RESUMEN
Available comparison of transperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (tRAPN) and retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (rRAPN) does not consider tumour's location. The aim of this study was to compare perioperative morbidity, and functional and pathological outcomes after tRAPN and rRAPN, with the specific hypothesis that tRAPN for anterior tumours and rRAPN for posterior tumours might be a beneficial strategy. A large global collaborative dataset of 1169 cT1-2N0M0 patients was used. Propensity score matching, and logistic and linear regression analyses tested the effect of tRAPN versus rRAPN on perioperative outcomes. No differences were observed between rRAPN and tRAPN with respect to complications, operative time, length of stay, ischaemia time, median 1-yr estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and positive surgical margins (all p>0.05). Median estimated blood loss and postoperative eGFR were 50 versus100ml (p<0.0001) and 82 versus 78ml/min/1.73 m2 (p=0.04) after rRAPN and tRAPN, respectively. At interaction tests, no advantage was observed after tRAPN for anterior tumours and rRAPN for posterior tumours with respect to complications, warm ischaemia time, postoperative eGFR, and positive surgical margins (all p>0.05). The techniques of rRAPN and tRAPN offer equivalent perioperative morbidity, and functional and pathological outcomes, regardless of tumour's location. PATIENT SUMMARY: Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy can be performed with a transperitoneal or a retroperitoneal approach regardless of the specific position of the tumour, with equivalent outcomes for the patient.
