Copyright
©The Author(s) 2016.
World J Clin Urol. Mar 24, 2016; 5(1): 60-65
Published online Mar 24, 2016. doi: 10.5410/wjcu.v5.i1.60
Published online Mar 24, 2016. doi: 10.5410/wjcu.v5.i1.60
RP (n = 54) | TP (n = 37) | P | |
Age at time of surgery, mean (SD) | 56.5 (13) | 57.2 (11.6) | 0.801 |
BMI (SD) | 31.1 (5.8) | 32.1 (7.0) | 0.511 |
Race | |||
Asian | 1 (1.9%) | 0 | 0.452 |
Black | 3 (5.6%) | 3 (8.1%) | |
Hispanic | 7 (13.0%) | 2 (5.4%) | |
Other | 0 | 1 (2.7%) | |
White | 43 (79.6%) | 31 (83.8%) | |
Sex | |||
Female | 17 (31.5%) | 17 (46.0%) | 0.163 |
Male | 37 (68.5%) | 20 (54.1%) | |
Preoperative creatinine, mean (SD) | 0.95 (0.21) n = 53 | 0.90 (0.17) n = 36 | 0.271 |
RP (n = 54) | TP (n = 37) | P | |
Renal location | |||
Left | 20 (37.0%) | 22 (59.5%) | 0.043 |
Right | 34 (63.0%) | 15 (40.5%) | |
Pathologic tumor size (cm), mean (SD) | 3.1 (1.6) n = 53 | 2.9 (1.2) n = 36 | 0.541 |
Surgical margin | |||
Negative | 50 (98.0%) | 32 (91.4%) | 0.302 |
Positive | 1 (2.0%) | 3 (8.6%) | |
RENAL score, mean (SD) | 6.5 (1.9) | 6.6 (1.8) | 0.711 |
Radius | |||
1 | 42 (77.8%) | 33 (89.2%) | 0.412 |
2 | 10 (18.5%) | 4 (10.8%) | |
3 | 2 (3.7%) | 0 | |
Exophytic | |||
1 | 29 (53.7%) | 15 (40.5%) | 0.412 |
2 | 20 (37.0%) | 19 (51.4%) | |
3 | 5 (9.3%) | 3 (8.1%) | |
Nearness | |||
1 | 23 (42.6%) | 15 (40.5%) | 0.943 |
2 | 8 (14.8%) | 5 (13.5%) | |
3 | 23 (42.6%) | 17 (46.0%) | |
Location relative to polar line | |||
1 | 30 (55.6%) | 19 (51.4%) | 0.513 |
2 | 12 (22.2%) | 6 (16.2%) | |
3 | 12 (22.2%) | 12 (32.4%) |
RP (n = 54) | TP (n = 37) | P | |
Total operative time (SD) | 180.7 (62.3) | 227.8 (59.0) | < 0.0011 |
Robot console time, mean (SD) | 126.9 (40.0) | 164.3 (51.3) | < 0.0011 |
WIT, median (IQR)4 | 28.0 (20-31) | 27.0 (21-31) | 0.963 |
n = 23 | n = 28 | ||
Conversion | |||
No | 52 (96.3%) | 32 (86.5%) | 0.122 |
Yes | 2 (3.7%) | 5 (13.5%) | |
EBL, median (IQR) | 32.5 (20-100) | 150.0 (50-250) | < 0.0013 |
- Citation: Wetterlin JJ, Blackwell RH, Capodice S, Kliethermes S, Quek ML, Gupta GN. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: A comparison of approaches to the posterior renal mass. World J Clin Urol 2016; 5(1): 60-65
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2219-2816/full/v5/i1/60.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5410/wjcu.v5.i1.60