Robotic posterior retroperitoneal adrenalectomy versus laparoscopic posterior retroperitoneal adrenalectomy: outcomes from a pooled analysis.

Background: The comparative advantages of robotic posterior retroperitoneal adrenalectomy (RPRA) over laparoscopic posterior retroperitoneal adrenalectomy (LPRA) remain a topic of ongoing debate within the medical community. This systematic literature review and meta-analysis aim to assess the safety and efficacy of RPRA compared to LPRA, with the ultimate goal of determining which procedure yields superior clinical outcomes. Methods: A systematic search was conducted on databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library database to identify relevant studies, encompassing both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs, that compare the outcomes of RPRA and LPRA. The primary focus of this study was to evaluate perioperative surgical outcomes and complications. Review Manager 5.4 was used for this analysis. The study was registered with PROSPERO (ID: CRD42023453816). Results: A total of seven non-RCTs were identified and included in this study, encompassing a cohort of 675 patients. The findings indicate that RPRA exhibited superior performance compared to LPRA in terms of hospital stay (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.78 days, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.46 to -0.10; p = 0.02). However, there were no statistically significant differences observed between the two techniques in terms of operative time, blood loss, transfusion rates, conversion rates, major complications, and overall complications. Conclusion: RPRA is associated with a significantly shorter hospital stay compared to LPRA, while demonstrating comparable operative time, blood loss, conversion rate, and complication rate. However, it is important to note that further research of a more comprehensive and rigorous nature is necessary to validate these findings. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=453816, identifier CRD42023453816.

Perioperative, oncologic, and functional outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for special types of renal tumors (hilar, endophytic, or cystic): an evidence-based analysis of comparative outcomes.

Purpose: This study aims to perform a pooled analysis to compare the outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) between complex tumors (hilar, endophytic, or cystic) and non-complex tumors (nonhilar, exophytic, or solid) and evaluate the effects of renal tumor complexity on outcomes in patients undergoing RAPN. Methods: Four databases were systematically searched, including Science, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, to identify relevant studies published in English up to December 2022. Review Manager 5.4 was used for statistical analyses and calculations. The study was registered with PROSPERO (Registration number: CRD42023394792). Results: In total, 14 comparative trials, including 3758 patients were enrolled. Compared to non-complex tumors, complex tumors were associated with a significantly longer warm ischemia time (WMD 3.67 min, 95% CI 1.78, 5.57; p = 0.0001), more blood loss (WMD 22.84 mL, 95% CI 2.31, 43.37; p = 0.03), and a higher rate of major complications (OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.50, 3.67; p = 0.0002). However, no statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in operative time, length of stay, transfusion rates, conversion to open nephrectomy and radical nephrectomy rates, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decline, intraoperative complication, overall complication, positive surgical margins (PSM), local recurrence, and trifecta achievement. Conclusions: RAPN can be a safe and effective procedure for complex tumors (hilar, endophytic, or cystic) and provides comparable functional and oncologic outcomes to non-complex tumors. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=394792, identifier CRD42023394792.

Morphometric study of the testis and reproductive tract (including sperm granuloma) after vasectomy in mature rats.

By utilizing the rabbit model, previous studies have found good evidence indicating that vasectomy-induced spermatogenic damage is pressure-mediated: the damage occurs when the occluded reproductive tract is unable to accommodate additional spermatozoa produced by the testis. More studies with the more commonly used rat model have shown, however, controversial results on whether and why the damage occurs. In this study, 12 mature male Sprague-Dawley rats were subjected to unilateral vasectomy: double ligation (without severing) of the vas deferens exposed via a small inguinal incision; 37 days after the operation, the testes, epididymides, vasa deferentia (juxta-epididymal segments), and sperm granulomas (at the vasectomy site) were removed to obtain methacrylate resin-embedded sections and morphometric studies carried out with light microscopy. Marked spermatogenic damage with spermatids and spermatocytes depleted in the seminiferous epithelium in 43% of the seminiferous tubule profiles was demonstrated in 5 of the 12 testes on the vasectomized side, and the damage was associated with smaller or absent sperm granulomas; in the other 7 testes with essentially normal spermatogenesis, there was an increase (by 111% on average) in the volume of the tubule lumen, associated with larger granulomas or granulomas containing more spermatozoa. There was an overall increase (by 66%) in the thickness of the rete testis in the 12 testes; the epididymis or vas deferens showed no distension. It seems therefore that the spermatogenic damage induced by vasectomy in rats is pressure-mediated as well, and that variation in the damage depends mainly on the postoperative development of the sperm granuloma.