RESUMEN
CONTEXT: Partial nephrectomy (PN) with intraoperative guidance by biophotonics has the potential to improve surgical outcomes due to higher precision. However, its value remains unclear since high-level evidence is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To provide a comprehensive analysis of biophotonic techniques used for intraoperative real-time assistance during PN. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We performed a comprehensive database search based on the PICO criteria, including studies published before October 2022. Two independent reviewers screened the titles and abstracts followed by full-text screening of eligible studies. For a quantitative analysis, a meta-analysis was conducted. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: In total, 35 studies were identified for the qualitative analysis, including 27 studies on near-infrared fluorescence (NIRF) imaging using indocyanine green, four studies on hyperspectral imaging, two studies on folate-targeted molecular imaging, and one study each on optical coherence tomography and 5-aminolevulinic acid. The meta-analysis investigated seven studies on selective arterial clamping using NIRF. There was a significantly shorter warm ischemia time in the NIRF-PN group (mean difference [MD]: -2.9; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -5.6, -0.1; p = 0.04). No differences were noted regarding transfusions (odds ratio [OR]: 0.5; 95% CI: 0.2, 1.7; p = 0.27), positive surgical margins (OR: 0.7; 95% CI: 0.2, 2.0; p = 0.46), or major complications (OR: 0.4; 95% CI: 0.1, 1.2; p = 0.08). In the NIRF-PN group, functional results were favorable at short-term follow-up (MD of glomerular filtration rate decline: 7.6; 95% CI: 4.6, 10.5; p < 0.01), but leveled off at long-term follow-up (MD: 7.0; 95% CI: -2.8, 16.9; p = 0.16). Remarkably, these findings were not confirmed by the included randomized controlled trial. CONCLUSIONS: Biophotonics comprises a heterogeneous group of imaging modalities that serve intraoperative decision-making and guidance. Implementation into clinical practice and cost effectiveness are the limitations that should be addressed by future research. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed the application of biophotonics during partial removal of the kidney in patients with kidney cancer. Our results suggest that these techniques support the surgeon in successfully performing the challenging steps of the procedure.
Asunto(s)
Nefrectomía , Nefrectomía/métodos , Humanos , Neoplasias Renales/cirugía , Cirugía Asistida por Computador/métodos , Imagen Óptica/métodos , Cuidados Intraoperatorios/métodos , Verde de Indocianina , Óptica y FotónicaRESUMEN
CONTEXT: Holmium (HoLEP) and thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) are the two methods most commonly applied for endoscopic enucleation of the prostate. It remains unclear which of the two is superior in terms of outcome and complications. OBJECTIVE: To compare perioperative and functional outcomes between HoLEP and ThuLEP. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration and in line with the PRISMA criteria. A comprehensive database search including MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and CENTRAL was conducted according to the PICO criteria. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were considered. All review steps were conducted by two independent reviewers. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane tool for RCTs. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The search identified 556 studies, of which four were eligible for qualitative and quantitative analysis, reporting on a total of 579 patients with follow-up of up to 18 months. No significant differences in operating time, enucleation weight, catheterization time, or hospital stay were observed between ThuLEP and HoLEP. The decrease in hemoglobin was significantly lower for ThuLEP (mean difference -0.54 g/dl, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.93 to -0.15; p < 0.001), but with low certainty of evidence. Transient urinary incontinence was more common for HoLEP (odds ratio 0.56, 95% CI 0.32-0.99; p = 0.045), again with low certainty of evidence. Furthermore, no significant differences were observed for other complications or for functional measures and symptom scores. CONCLUSIONS: ThuLEP and HoLEP offer comparable improvement in symptoms and postoperative voiding parameters. Both procedures are safe and major complications are rare. ThuLEP showed minor advantages for blood loss and the incidence of transient incontinence. This should be interpreted with caution owing to the low certainty of evidence. Therefore, treatment choice should be based on surgeon expertise and local conditions. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed four clinical trials that compared holmium and thulium lasers for treatment to reduce the size of the prostate gland. Our review assessed outcomes and complications. We found that both laser techniques are safe and suitable for reducing symptoms due to an enlarged prostate. Blood loss and short-lasting urinary incontinence were slightly lower after thulium compared to holmium laser treatment.