Robotic versus hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy: comparison of two minimally invasive techniques in kidney transplantation.

Robot-assisted donor nephrectomy (RDN) is increasingly used due to its advantages such as its precision and reduced learning curve when compared to laparoscopic techniques. Concerns remain among surgeons regarding possible longer warm ischemia time. This study aimed to compare patients undergoing robotic living donor nephrectomy to the more frequently used hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy (HLDN) technique, focusing on warm ischemia time, total operative time, learning curve, hospital length of stay, donor renal function and post-operative complications. Retrospective study comparing RDN to HLDN in a collaborative transplant network. 176 patients were included, 72 in RDN and 104 in HLDN. Left-sided nephrectomy was favored in RDN (82% vs 52%, p < 0.01). Operative time was longer in RDN (287 vs 160 min; p < 0.01), while warm ischemia time was similar (221 vs 213 secs, p = 0.446). The hospital stay was shorter in RDN (3.9 vs 5.7 days, p < 0.01).Concerning renal function, a slightpersistent increase of 7% of the creatinine ratio was observed in the RDN compared to the HLDN group (1.56 vs 1.44 at 1-month checkup, p < 0.01). The results show that RDN appears safe and efficient in comparison to the gold-standard HLDN technique. Warm ischemia time was similar for both techniques, whereas RDN operative time was longer. Patients undergoing RDN had a shorter hospital stay, this being possibly mitigated by differences in center release criteria. Donor renal function needs to be assessed on a longer-term basis for both techniques.

Substaging of pT1 Urothelial Bladder Carcinoma Predicts Tumor Progression and Overall Survival.

INTRODUCTION: Limitations in tumor staging and the heterogeneous natural evolution of pT1 urothelial bladder carcinoma (UBC) make the choice of treatment challenging. We evaluated if histopathological substaging (pT1a, pT1b, and pT1c) helps predict disease recurrence, progression, and overall survival following transurethral resection of the bladder (TURB). METHODS: We included 239 consecutive patients diagnosed with pT1 UBC at TURB in a single institution since 2001. Each sample was interpreted by our specialized uropathologists trained to subclassify pT1 stage. Three groups were distinguished according to the degree of invasion: T1a (up to the muscularis mucosae [MM]), T1b (into the MM), and T1c (beyond the MM). RESULTS: T1 substaging was possible in 217/239 (90%) patients. pT1a, b, and c occurred in 124 (57), 59 (27), and 34 (16%), respectively. The median follow-up was 3.1 years, with a cumulative recurrence rate of 52%, progression rate of 20%, and survival rate of 54%. Recurrence was not significantly associated with tumor substage (p = 0.61). However, the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed a significantly higher progression rate among T1b (31) and T1c (26%) tumors than T1a (13%) (log-rank test: p = 0.001) stages. In a multivariable model including gender, age, ASA score, smoking, tumor grade, and presence of carcinoma in situ, T1 substage was the single variable significantly associated with progression-free survival (HR 1.7, p = 0.005). Nineteen patients (9%) needed radical cystectomy; among them, 12/19 (63%) had an invasive tumor. Overall survival was significantly associated with tumor substaging (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Histopathological substaging of pT1 UBC is significantly associated with tumor progression and overall survival and therefore appears to be a useful prognostic tool to counsel patients about treatment options.