Corrigendum to "RPN (Radius, Position of tumour, iNvasion of renal sinus) Classification and Nephrometry Scoring System: An Internationally Developed Clinical Classification To Describe the Surgical Difficulty for Renal Masses for Which Robotic Partial Nephrectomy Is Planned" [Eur. Urol. Open Sci. 54 (2023) 33-42].

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.05.007.].

Off-clamp Versus On-clamp Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy: A Propensity-matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Partial nephrectomy is the preferred treatment option for the management of small renal masses. On-clamp partial nephrectomy is associated with a risk of ischemia and a greater loss of postoperative renal function, while the off-clamp procedure decreases the duration of renal ischemia, leading to better renal function preservation. However, the efficacy of the off- versus on-clamp partial nephrectomy for renal function preservation remains debatable. OBJECTIVE: To compare perioperative and functional outcomes following off- and on-clamp robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This study used the prospective multinational collaborative Vattikuti Collective Quality Initiative (VCQI) database for RAPN. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary objective of this study was the comparison of perioperative and functional outcomes between patients who underwent off- and on-clamp RAPN. Propensity scores were calculated for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), renal nephrometry score (RNS) and preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of the 2114 patients, 210 had undergone off-clamp RAPN and others on-clamp procedure. Propensity matching was possible for 205 patients in a 1:1 ratio. After matching, the two groups were comparable for age, sex, BMI, tumor size, multifocality, tumor side, face of tumor, RNS, polar location of the tumor, surgical access, and preoperative hemoglobin, creatinine, and eGFR. There was no difference between the two groups for intraoperative (4.8% vs 5.3%, p = 0.823) and postoperative (11.2% vs 8.3%, p = 0.318) complications. Need for blood transfusion (2.9% vs 0, p = 0.030) and conversion to radical nephrectomy (10.2% vs 1%, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the off-clamp group. At the last follow-up, there was no difference between the two groups for creatinine and eGFR. The mean fall in eGFR at the last follow-up compared with that at baseline was equivalent between the two groups (-16.0 vs -17.3 ml/min, p = 0.985). CONCLUSIONS: Off-clamp RAPN does not result in better renal functional preservation. Alternatively, it may be associated with increased rates of conversion to radical nephrectomy and need for blood transfusion. PATIENT SUMMARY: With this multicentric study, we noted that performing robotic partial nephrectomy without clamping the blood supply to the kidney is not associated with better preservation of renal function. However, off-clamp partial nephrectomy is associated with increased rates of conversion to radical nephrectomy and blood transfusion.

Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in morbidly obese patients: a VCQI database study.

To compare perioperative outcomes following robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) in patients with morbid obesity (body mass index (BMI > 40 kg/m2)) and non-obese patients. Using the Vattikuti Collective quality initiative (VCQI) database for RAPN, data for morbidly obese and non-obese patients was obtained. Propensity scores were calculated for two treatment groups (morbidly obese vs. non-obese) for the following variables i.e. age, sex, tumor size, RNS, surgical access (retroperitoneal/transperitoneal) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) to ensure comparability. The primary outcome for the study was comparison of trifecta between the two groups. In this study, 158 morbidly obese patients were matched with 158 non-obese patients undergoing RAPN. Two groups matched well for age, sex, tumor size, eGFR and RNS. There was no difference between two groups for ischemia time, blood loss, blood transfusion, conversion to radical nephrectomy, length of stay, intraoperative and postoperative complications. Operative time was longer in morbidly obese patients (median 210 min vs. 120 min, p = 0.000). On pathological analysis, malignant tumors were more likely in the morbidly obese group (83.1% vs.73.4%, p = 0.018). Trifecta outcomes were comparable between the two groups (60.1% vs. 63.3%, p = 0.563). The Median duration of follow-up was 12 months (1-96 months). The morbidly obese group had significantly higher day one creatinine (1.25 ± 0.7 vs. 1.07 ± 0.37, p = 0.001) and significantly lower day one eGFR (62.1 ± 19 vs. 69.2 ± 21, p = 0.018). However, there was no difference between the two groups for the last follow-up creatinine and eGFR. RAPN in morbidly obese patients is associated with equivalent perioperative outcomes compared to non-obese patients.

Trifecta and pentafecta outcomes following robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in a multi-institutional cohort of Indian patients.

Introduction: The literature on studies reporting trifecta or pentafecta outcomes following robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) in Indian patients is limited. The primary aim of this study was to report and evaluate the factors predicting trifecta and pentafecta outcomes following RAPN in Indian patients using the multicentric Vattikuti collective quality initiative (VCQI) database. Methods: From the VCQI database for patients who underwent RAPN, data for Indian patients were extracted and analyzed for factors predicting the achievement of trifecta and pentafecta following RAPN. Trifecta was defined as the absence of complications, negative surgical margins, and warm ischemia period shorter than 25 min or zero ischemia. Pentafecta covers all the trifecta criteria as well as >90% preservation of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and no stage upgrade of chronic kidney disease at 12 months. Results: In this study, among 614 patients, the trifecta was achieved in 374 patients (60.9%) and pentafecta was achieved in 24.2% of the patients. Patients who achieved trifecta had significantly higher mean age (54.1 vs. 51.0 years, P = 0.005), body mass index (BMI) (26.7 vs. 26.03 kg/m2, P = 0.022), and smaller tumor size (38.6 vs. 41.4 mm, P = 0.028). The preoperative eGFR (84.2 vs. 91.9 ml/min, P = 0.012) and renal nephrometry score (RNS) (6.96 vs. 7.87, P ≤ 0.0001) were significantly lower in the trifecta group. Comparing patients who achieved pentafecta to those who did not, we noted a statistically significant difference between the two groups for tumor size (36.1 vs. 41.5 mm, P = 0.017) and RNS (6.6 vs. 7.7, P = 0.0001). On multivariate analysis, BMI and RNS were associated with trifecta outcomes. Similarly, only RNS was identified as an independent predictor of pentafecta. Conclusions: RNS and BMI were independent predictors of the trifecta. At the same time, RNS was identified as an independent predictor of pentafecta following RAPN.

Development and Validation of a Nomogram Predicting Intraoperative Adverse Events During Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Ability to predict the risk of intraoperative adverse events (IOAEs) for patients undergoing partial nephrectomy (PN) can be of great clinical significance. OBJECTIVE: To develop and internally validate a preoperative nomogram predicting IOAEs for robot-assisted PN (RAPN). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this observational study, data for demographic, preoperative, and postoperative variables for patients who underwent RAPN were extracted from the Vattikuti Collective Quality Initiative (VCQI) database. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: IOAEs were defined as the occurrence of intraoperative surgical complications, blood transfusion, or conversion to open surgery/radical nephrectomy. Backward stepwise logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of IOAEs. The nomogram was validated using bootstrapping, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and the goodness of fit. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to determine the clinical utility of the model. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Among the 2114 patients in the study cohort, IOAEs were noted in 158 (7.5%). Multivariable analysis identified five variables as independent predictors of IOAEs: RENAL nephrometry score (odds ratio [OR] 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-1.25); clinical tumor size (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.001-1.024); PN indication as absolute versus elective (OR 3.9, 95% CI 2.6-5.7) and relative versus elective (OR 4.2, 95% CI 2.2-8); Charlson comorbidity index (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.05-1.30); and multifocal tumors (OR 8.8, 95% CI 5.4-14.1). A nomogram was developed using these five variables. The model was internally valid on bootstrapping and goodness of fit. The AUC estimated was 0.76 (95% CI 0.72-0.80). DCA revealed that the model was clinically useful at threshold probabilities >5%. Limitations include the lack of external validation and selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and internally validated a nomogram predicting IOAEs during RAPN. PATIENT SUMMARY: We developed a preoperative model than can predict complications that might occur during robotic surgery for partial removal of a kidney. Tests showed that our model is fairly accurate and it could be useful in identifying patients with kidney cancer for whom this type of surgery is suitable.

Perioperative outcomes following robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for complex renal masses: A Vattikuti Collective Quality Initiative database study.

Introduction: Outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) depend on tumor complexity, surgeon experience and patient profile among other variables. We aimed to study the perioperative outcomes of RAPN for patients with complex renal masses using the Vattikuti Collective Quality Initiative (VCQI) database that allowed evaluation of multinational data. Methods: From the VCQI, we extracted data for all the patients who underwent RAPN with preoperative aspects and dimensions used for an anatomical (PADUA) score of ≥10. Multivariate logistic regression was conducted to ascertain predictors of trifecta (absence of complications, negative surgical margins, and warm ischemia times [WIT] <25 min or zero ischemia) outcomes. Results: Of 3,801 patients, 514 with PADUA scores ≥10 were included. The median operative time, WIT, and blood loss were 173 (range 45-546) min, 21 (range 0-55) min, and 150 (range 50-3500) ml, respectively. Intraoperative complications and blood transfusions were reported in 2.1% and 6%, respectively. In 8.8% of the patients, postoperative complications were noted, and surgical margins were positive in 10.3% of the patients. Trifecta could be achieved in 60.7% of patients. Clinical tumor size, duration of surgery, WIT, and complication rates were significantly higher in the group with a high (12 or 13) PADUA score while the trifecta was significantly lower in this group (48.4%). On multivariate analysis, surgical approach (retroperitoneal vs. transperitoneal) and high PADUA score (12/13) were identified as predictors of the trifecta outcomes. Conclusion: RAPN may be a reasonable surgical option for patients with complex renal masses with acceptable perioperative outcomes.

Perioperative outcomes following robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in elderly patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare perioperative outcomes following robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) in patients with age ≥ 70 years to age < 70 years. METHODS: Using Vattikuti Collective quality initiative (VCQI) database for RAPN we compared perioperative outcomes following RAPN between the two age groups. Primary outcome of the study was to compare trifecta outcomes between the two groups. Propensity matching using nearest neighbourhood method was performed with trifecta as primary outcome for sex, body mass index (BMI), solitary kidney, tumor size and Renal nephrometery score (RNS). RESULTS: Group A (age ≥ 70 years) included 461 patients whereas group B included 1932 patients. Before matching the two groups were statistically different for RNS and solitary kidney rates. After propensity matching, the two groups were comparable for baselines characteristics such as BMI, tumor size, clinical symptoms, tumor side, face of tumor, solitary kidney and tumor complexity. Among the perioperative outcome parameters there was no difference between two groups for operative time, blood loss, intraoperative transfusion, intraoperative complications, need for radical nephrectomy, positive margins and trifecta rates. Warm ischemia time was significantly longer in the younger age group (18.1 min vs. 16.3 min, p = 0.003). Perioperative complications were significantly higher in the older age group (11.8% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.041). However, there was no difference between the two groups for major complications. CONCLUSION: RAPN in well-selected elderly patients is associated with comparable trifecta outcomes with acceptable perioperative morbidity.

Robotic Kidney Transplantation Under Regional Hypothermia.

The technique of robotic kidney transplantation (RKT) under regional hypothermia is being described. It may be performed in all patients requiring kidney transplantation with some relative contraindications. Unlike open transplantation, RKT is a transperitoneal procedure. Patient lies supine with low lithotomy and 15° to 20° reverse Trendelenburg position. Port placement is like standard radical prostatectomy with a multiport device placed at the umbilicus. The graft after harvest needs special care on the bench to ligate all vascular communications and placed in a gauze jacket for easy handling. After transplant bed preparation, the graft is introduced in peritoneal cavity through the umbilical opening and placed over the bladder flap bed with ice slush for hypothermia. End-to-side vascular anastomoses of renal vein and artery are done with the graft lying in pelvic hollow and renal vessels facing laterally to external iliac vessels. After vascular anastomoses, the graft is rotated laterally to iliac fossa to be fixed with preformed peritoneal flap. A stented ureterovesicostomy to the recipient is done using extravesical technique. The external opening for introducing the graft and the robotic port openings is closed after leaving a drain. Postoperative (PO) care and PO immunosuppression are like the open counterpart, except the treatment of drain, which is removed on second PO day. Obese recipients and multiple graft vessels may be handled comfortably during RKT with described techniques. It is important to follow certain checkpoints to avoid bleeding. With graft and patient survival of 95.2% and 94.5%, respectively, RKT outcomes are noninferior to open technique in the published data. The RKT has less incidence of PO pain, wound infection, and symptomatic lymphoceles.

Comparison of perioperative outcomes following transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a propensity-matched analysis of VCQI database.

OBJECTIVE: To compare perioperative outcomes following retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPRAPN) and transperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (TPRAPN). METHODS: With this Vattikuti Collective Quality Initiative (VCQI) database, study propensity scores were calculated according to the surgical access (TPRAPN and RPRAPN) for the following independent variables, i.e., age, sex, side of the surgery, RENAL nephrometry scores (RNS), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and serum creatinine. The study's primary outcome was the comparison of trifecta between the two groups. RESULTS: In this study, 309 patients who underwent RPRAPN were matched with 309 patients who underwent TPRAPN. The two groups matched well for age, sex, tumor side, polar location of the tumor, RNS, preoperative creatinine and eGFR. Operative time and warm ischemia time were significantly shorter with RPRAPN. Intraoperative blood loss and need for blood transfusion were lower with RPRAPN. There was a significantly higher number of intraoperative complications with RPRAPN. However, there was no difference in the two groups for postoperative complications. Trifecta outcomes were better with RPRAPN (70.2% vs. 53%, p < 0.0001) compared to TPRAPN. We noted no significant change in overall results when controlled for tumor location (anteriorly or posteriorly). The surgical approach, tumor size and RNS were identified as independent predictors of trifecta on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: RPRAPN is associated with superior perioperative outcomes in well-selected patients compared to TPRAPN. However, the data for the retroperitoneal approach were contributed by a few centers with greater experience with this technique, thus limiting the generalizability of the results of this study.

ABO-Incompatible Kidney Transplantation in India: A Single-Center Experience of First Hundred Cases.

Aim: ABO-incompatible (ABOi) kidney transplantation overcomes immunological barrier of blood group incompatibility. There have been very few published experiences of ABOi kidney transplantation from India. We present our single-center experience of the first hundred ABOi kidney transplants. Material and Methods: This is a single-center retrospective study of consecutive first hundred ABOi kidney transplant with at least 6 months of follow-up. Results: During the study period (2011-2020), a total of 121 ABOi kidney transplants were performed. Of these, first hundred patients were analyzed. Median follow-up duration was 33 (10-101) months. Mean recipient and donor age were 41.5 ± 13 and 47.68 ± 11.25 years, respectively. Mean HLA mismatch was 4 ± 1.5. Median baseline anti-blood group antibody titer was 128 (2-1024). Most common recipient blood group was O. Patient and death censored graft survival was 93% and 94%, respectively, at median follow-up of 33 months. Biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) rate was 17% with acute antibody-mediated rejection being 3%. Rate of infection was 37%, most common being urinary tract infection. Conclusion: ABOi kidney transplant patients had acceptable patient and graft survival as well as BPAR rates. With current preconditioning protocol, infection rate was high.

Comparison of estimated glomerular filtration rate of marginal versus standard renal allograft: A prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: The end-stage renal disease (ESRD) population is increasing worldwide and organ shortage is an important issue. The disparity between the availability of organs and waitlisted patients for transplants has forced many transplant centers across the world to use marginal kidney donors. We assess and compare postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) in patients who received a graft from marginal renal donor (MRD) versus those who received a graft from standard renal donor (SRD). METHODS: A total of 214 patients with ESRD underwent open live donor renal allografting from September 2015 to September 2017. Out of 214 donors, 165 (77.1%) were SRD and 49 (22.9%) were MRD. Post-transplant eGFR was calculated at 2 months for donors and at days 1, 3, 5, and 7 and month 1, 3, 6, and 12 for recipients. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in eGFR of recipients at preoperative and postoperative period between SRD and MRD groups. Although at 12 months of follow-up eGFR was relatively high in SRD group, it did not show any statistically significant difference. The recipient survival rate at 1-year follow-up was 98.2% in SRD and 100% in MRD group. CONCLUSIONS: Renal transplant recipients using MRDs have a comparable glomerular filtration rate to SRDs at the end of 1 year. Short-term outcomes in recipients receiving marginal renal grafts were similar when compared to the allograft from standard donors.

Outcomes in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for imperative vs elective indications.

OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare peri-operative outcomes of patients undergoing robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) for imperative vs elective indications. PATIENT AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed a multinational database of 3802 adults who underwent RAPN for elective and imperative indications. Laparoscopic or open partial nephrectomy (PN) were excluded. Baseline data for age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anaesthesiologists score and PADUA score were examined. Patients undergoing RAPN for an imperative indication were matched to those having surgery for an elective indication using propensity scores in a 1:3 ratio. Primary outcomes included organ ischaemic time, operating time, estimated blood loss (EBL), rate of blood transfusions, Clavien-Dindo complications, conversion to radical nephrectomy (RN) and positive surgical margin (PSM) status. RESULTS: After propensity-score matching for baseline variables, a total of 304 patients (76 imperative vs 228 elective indications) were included in the final analysis. No significant differences were found between groups for ischaemia time (19.9 vs 19.8 min; P = 0.94), operating time (186 vs 180 min; P = 0.55), EBL (217 vs 190 mL; P = 0.43), rate of blood transfusions (2.7% vs 3.7%; P = 0.51), or Clavien-Dindo complications (P = 0.31). A 38.6% (SD 47.9) decrease in Day-1 postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate was observed in the imperative indication group and an 11.3% (SD 45.1) decrease was observed in the elective indication group (P < 0.005). There were no recorded cases of permanent or temporary dialysis. There were no conversions to RN in the imperative group, and seven conversions (5.6%) in the elective group (P = 0.69). PSMs were seen in 1.4% (1/76) of the imperative group and in 3.3% of the elective group (7/228; P = 0.69). CONCLUSION: We conclude that RAPN is feasible and safe for imperative indications and demonstrates similar outcomes to those achieved for elective indications.

A retrospective multi-center experience of renal transplants from India during COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to a sudden drop in renal transplant numbers across India in the initial months of 2020. Although the transplant numbers increased with easing of lockdown, the outcome of these transplants remains unknown. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational, multi-center study done across eight different transplant centers in India. All the transplants done from January 30, 2020 to December 31, 2020 were included. The primary outcomes studied were patient and death censored graft survival as well as incidence of COVID-19 infection and its outcomes. RESULTS: During the study period a total of 297 kidney transplants were done. After a median follow up of 265 days the patient and death censored graft survival was 95.3% and 97.6%, respectively. Forty-one patients (13.8%) developed COVID-19 post-transplant. Majority (58.5%) were asymptomatic to mildly symptomatic and the case fatality ratio was 14.6%. On multivariable logistic regression analysis older age was associated with higher likelihood of COVID-19 infection (odds ratio 1.038; CI 1.002-1.077). CONCLUSIONS: Patient and graft outcome of kidney transplants done during the COVID-19 pandemic in India was acceptable. The incidence of COVID-19 was 13.8% with a high case fatality ratio.

Robotic Kidney Transplantation with Regional Hypothermia versus Open Kidney Transplantation for Patients with End Stage Renal Disease: An Ideal Stage 2B Study.

PURPOSE: We report on comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive versus traditional open kidney transplantation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We undertook a prospective cohort study of 654 patients who underwent open or robotic kidney transplantation at a single tertiary care hospital between January 2013 and December 2015. Primary outcome was delayed graft function, defined as the need for dialysis within 1 week of surgery. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, pain, graft rejection, and graft and patient survival. Nonparsimonious propensity score and Ding-VanderWeele analytical methods were used to account for confounding bias. RESULTS: Within the 1:3 matched cohort (robotic 126, open 378; well matched with standardized mean difference ∼10%), the robotic approach was associated with lower rates of wound infections (0% vs 4%, p=0.023) and symptomatic lymphoceles (0% vs 7% at 36 months, p=0.003), as well as reduced postoperative pain, requirement for narcotic analgesia and blood loss. There were no differences between the 2 groups, robotic versus open, with respect to graft function (delayed graft function 0% vs 2.4%, p=0.081), hospital stay (median 8 days for both, p=0.647), graft rejection (16.2% vs 18.6% at 36 months, p=0.643), and graft (95.2% vs 96.3% at 36 months, p=0.266) and overall survival (94.5% vs 98.1% at 36 months, p=0.307). Ding-VanderWeele analysis suggested minimal influence of unknown confounders on study findings. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia was associated with a lower rate of postoperative complications and improved patient comfort in comparison to open kidney transplantation. Graft function, and graft and overall survival were comparable between the 2 techniques.

Feasibility and Functional Outcome of Robotic Assisted Kidney Transplantation Using Grafts With Multiple Vessels: Comparison to Propensity Matched Contemporary Open Kidney Transplants Cohort.

Introduction: The aim of the study was to report the perioperative and functional results of Robotic assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) in Grafts with multiple vessels (GMVs) and compare it to the results of Open kidney transplantation (OKT) with GMVs. Materials and Methods: Patients undergoing RAKT from living donors using GMVs were reviewed from prospectively collected RAKT database at our institution between March 2013 and March 2018. Patient undergoing Open kidney transplantation (OKT) using GMVs served as controls. Ex-vivo bench surgical reconstruction of GMVs was done according to specific anatomy. Propensity score matching was used to balance the sample size in the two groups. Results: Of 153 RAKT and OKT procedures, 86 cases were eligible for propensity score matching for the statistically significant variables (standardized difference >0.10) and 43 procedures were assigned to each group. Median anastomoses, total and cold ischemia and rewarming times did not differ significantly between the RAKT and OKT groups. In comparison with OKT in GMVs we found that RAKT with GMVs had less pain score on post op 2nd day (p = 0.03). There was also a significant difference in mean analgesic requirement (p = 0.02), hospital stay (p = 0.05) and incision length (p = 0.04). Most of the major, minor surgical, and medical postoperative complications were comparable between the two groups except for wound related events (p = 0.002). Conclusion: Multiplicity of renal vessels in RAKT does not adversely affect patient or graft survival compared with the OKT. Satisfactory functional outcome can be achieved by RAKT similar to OKT in GMVs. RAKT seems to have advantage over OKT in that it is less invasive and has the potential to cause fewer low grade complications. Small sample size and short follow-up are the main limitations of the study.

Omission of Cortical Renorrhaphy During Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Vattikuti Collective Quality Initiative Database Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the outcomes of patients in whom cortical (outer) renorrhaphy (CR) was omitted during robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN). METHODS: We analyzed 1453 patients undergoing RPN, from 2006 to 2018, within a large multi-institutional database. Patients having surgery for bilateral tumors (n = 73) were excluded. CR and no-CR groups were compared in terms of operative and ischemia time, estimated blood loss (EBL), complications, surgical margins, hospital stay, change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and need of angioembolization. Inverse probability of treatment weighting with Firth correction for center code was performed to account for selection bias. RESULTS: CR was omitted in 120 patients (8.7%); 1260 (91.3%) patients underwent both inner layer and CR. There was no difference in intraoperative complications (7.4% CR; 8.9% no-CR group; P = .6), postoperative major complications (1% and 2.8% in CR and no-CR groups, respectively; P = .2), or median drop in eGFR (7.3 vs 10.4 mL/min/m2). The no-CR group had a higher incidence of minor complications (26.7% vs 5.5% in CR group; P < .001). EBL was 100 mL (IQR 50-200) in both groups (P = .6). Angioembolization was needed in 0.7% patients in CR vs 1.4% in no-CR group (P = .4). Additionally, there was no difference in median operative time (168 vs 162 min; P = .2) or ischemia time (18 vs 17 min; P = .7). CONCLUSION: In selected patients with renal masses, single layer renorrhaphy does not significantly improve operative time, ischemia time, or eGFR after RPN. There is a higher incidence of minor complications, but not major perioperative complications after no-CR technique.

Predicting intra-operative and postoperative consequential events using machine-learning techniques in patients undergoing robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a Vattikuti Collective Quality Initiative database study.

OBJECTIVE: To predict intra-operative (IOEs) and postoperative events (POEs) consequential to the derailment of the ideal clinical course of patient recovery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Vattikuti Collective Quality Initiative is a multi-institutional dataset of patients who underwent robot-assisted partial nephectomy for kidney tumours. Machine-learning (ML) models were constructed to predict IOEs and POEs using logistic regression, random forest and neural networks. The models to predict IOEs used patient demographics and preoperative data. In addition to these, intra-operative data were used to predict POEs. Performance on the test dataset was assessed using area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) and area under the precision-recall curve (PR-AUC). RESULTS: The rates of IOEs and POEs were 5.62% and 20.98%, respectively. Models for predicting IOEs were constructed using data from 1690 patients and 38 variables; the best model had an AUC-ROC of 0.858 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.762, 0.936) and a PR-AUC of 0.590 (95% CI 0.400, 0.759). Models for predicting POEs were trained using data from 1406 patients and 59 variables; the best model had an AUC-ROC of 0.875 (95% CI 0.834, 0.913) and a PR-AUC 0.706 (95% CI, 0.610, 0.790). CONCLUSIONS: The performance of the ML models in the present study was encouraging. Further validation in a multi-institutional clinical setting with larger datasets would be necessary to establish their clinical value. ML models can be used to predict significant events during and after surgery with good accuracy, paving the way for application in clinical practice to predict and intervene at an opportune time to avert complications and improve patient outcomes.

Retroperitoneal vs Transperitoneal Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy: Comparison in a Multi-institutional Setting.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) against transperitoneal approach in a multi-institutional prospective database, after accounting for potential selection bias that may affect this comparison. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Post-hoc analysis of the prospective arm of the Vattikuti Collective Quality Initiative database from 2014 to 2018. Six hundred and ninety consecutive patients underwent RAPN by 22 surgeons at 14 centers in 9 countries. Patients who had surgery at centers not performing retroperitoneal approach (n = 197) were excluded. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was done to account for potential selection bias by adjusting for age, gender, body mass index, comorbidities, side of surgery, location/size/complexity of tumor, renal function, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and year of surgery. Operative and perioperative outcomes were compared between weighted transperitoneal and retroperitoneal cohorts. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients underwent retroperitoneal RAPN; 394 underwent transperitoneal RAPN. Hospital stay in days-median 3.0 (Interquartile range [IQR] 2.0-4.0) transperitoneal vs 1.0 (1.0-3.0) retroperitoneal; P < .001, and blood loss in mL-125 (50-250) transperitoneal vs 100 (50-150) retroperitoneal; P = .007-were lower in the retroperitoneal group. There were no differences in operative time (P = .6), warm ischemia time (P = .6), intraoperative complications (P = .99), conversion to radical nephrectomy (P = .6), postoperative major complications (P = .6), positive surgical margins (P = .95), or drop in estimated glomerular filtration rate (P = .7). CONCLUSION: In a multi-institutional setting, both retroperitoneal and transperitoneal approach to RAPN have comparable operative and perioperative outcomes, except for shorter hospital stay with the retroperitoneal approach.