Conversion to Radical Nephrectomy From Robotic Partial Nephrectomy Is Most Commonly Due to Anatomic and Oncologic Complexity.

PURPOSE: Partial nephrectomy is standard-of-care treatment for small renal masses. As utilization of partial nephrectomy increases and includes larger and complex tumors, the risk of conversion to radical nephrectomy likely increases. We evaluated incidence and reason for conversion to radical nephrectomy in patients scheduled for partial nephrectomy by surgeons participating in MUSIC (the Michigan Urologic Surgery Improvement Collaborative). MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients in whom robotic partial nephrectomy was planned were stratified by completed procedure (robotic partial nephrectomy vs radical nephrectomy). Preoperative and intraoperative records were reviewed for preoperative assessment of difficulty and reason for conversion. Patient, tumor, pathologic, and practice variables were compared between cohorts. RESULTS: Of 650 patients scheduled for robotic partial nephrectomy, conversion to radical nephrectomy occurred in 27 (4.2%) patients. No conversions to open were reported. Preoperative documentation indicated a plan for possible conversion in 18 (67%) patients including partial with possible radical (n = 8), partial vs radical (n = 6), or likely radical nephrectomy (n = 4). Intraoperative documentation indicated that only 5 (19%) conversions were secondary to bleeding, with the remaining conversions due to tumor complexity and/or oncologic concerns. Patients undergoing conversion had larger (4.7 vs 2.8 cm, P < .001) and higher-complexity tumors (64% vs 6%, P < .001) with R.E.N.A.L. (for radius, exophytic/endophytic, nearness of tumor to collecting system, anterior/posterior, location relative to polar line) nephrometry score ≥ 10. The converted cases had a higher rate of ≥ pT3 (27% vs 8.4%, P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: There was a low rate of conversion from robotic partial to radical nephrectomy in the MUSIC-KIDNEY (Kidney mass: Identifying and Defining Necessary Evaluation and therapY) collaborative, and an even lower risk of conversion due to uncontrolled bleeding. Targeted review of each conversion identified appropriate decision-making based on oncologic risk in most cases.

The evolving management of small renal masses.

Small renal masses (SRMs) are a heterogeneous group of tumours with varying metastatic potential. The increasing use and improving quality of abdominal imaging have led to increasingly early diagnosis of incidental SRMs that are asymptomatic and organ confined. Despite improvements in imaging and the growing use of renal mass biopsy, diagnosis of malignancy before treatment remains challenging. Management of SRMs has shifted away from radical nephrectomy, with active surveillance and nephron-sparing surgery taking over as the primary modalities of treatment. The optimal treatment strategy for SRMs continues to evolve as factors affecting short-term and long-term outcomes in this patient cohort are elucidated through studies from prospective data registries. Evidence from rapidly evolving research in biomarkers, imaging modalities, and machine learning shows promise in improving understanding of the biology and management of this patient cohort.

Does Urologist-level Utilization of Active Surveillance for Low-risk Prostate Cancer Correspond with Utilization of Active Surveillance for Small Renal Masses?

Active surveillance (AS) for prostate cancer (CaP) or small renal masses (SRMs) helps in limiting the overtreatment of indolent malignancies. Implementation of AS for these conditions varies substantially across individual urologists. We examined the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) registry to assess for correlation of AS between patients with low-risk CaP and patients with SRM managed by individual urologists. We identified 27 urologists who treated at least ten patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network low-risk CaP and ten patients with SRMs between 2017 and 2021. For surgeons in the lowest quartile of AS use for low-risk CaP (<74%), 21% of their patients with SRMs were managed with AS, in comparison to 74% of patients of surgeons in the highest quartile (>90%). There was a modest positive correlation between the surgeon-level risk-adjusted proportions of patients managed with AS for low-risk CaP and for SRMs (Pearson correlation coefficient 0.48). A surgeon's tendency to use AS to manage one low-risk malignancy corresponds to their use of AS for a second low-risk condition. By identifying and correcting structural issues associated with underutilization of AS, interventions aimed at increasing AS use may have effects that influence clinical tendencies across a variety of urologic conditions. PATIENT SUMMARY: The use of active surveillance (AS) for patients with low-risk prostate cancer or small kidney masses varies greatly among individual urologists. Urologists who use AS for low-risk prostate cancer were more likely to use AS for patients with small kidney masses, but there is room to improve the use of AS for both of these conditions.

Practice-Level Variation in Opioid-Free Discharge Following Surgery for T1 Renal Masses: A MUSIC-KIDNEY Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid prescription following surgery has played a role in the current opioid epidemic. We evaluated practice-level variation in opioid prescribing following surgery for cT1 renal masses and examined the relationships between opioid-free discharge and postoperative emergency department (ED) visits and readmissions. METHODS: We retrospectively examined all T1 renal mass (RM) patients with data regarding postoperative opioid prescriptions within the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative-Kidney Mass: Identifying and Defining Necessary Evaluation and Therapy (MUSIC-KIDNEY) registry from April 2021 to March 2023. Patients were stratified into those who received opioids at discharge and those with opioid-free discharge. Associations with patient, tumor, and surgical factors were evaluated. Rates of postoperative ED visits and readmissions within 30 days were compared between cohorts. Practice-level variation was assessed. RESULTS: Of 414 patients who underwent surgery for T1 RM across 15 practices in MUSIC-KIDNEY, 23.7% had opioid-free discharge. Practice-level variation in rates of opioid-free discharge ranged from 6.7% to 55.0%. For patients prescribed opioids, the median number of pills was 10 (IQR 6-12). Patients with cT1b masses were more likely to have opioid-free discharge (44.9% vs 32%, OR 0.44; 95% CI 0.22-0.89). Rates of 30-day ED visits (7.0% vs 3.1%) and readmissions (4.1% vs 2.0%) were lower in the opioid-free discharge group but did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: MUSIC-KIDNEY data suggest opioid-free discharge is not associated with increased rates of postoperative ED visits or readmissions. There exists wide practice-level variation in opioid prescriptions following surgery for T1 RM in the state of Michigan. Similar variation likely exists throughout the United States, and best surgical practice suggests reduction in opioid prescribing after nephrectomy.

Complications of single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: multi-institutional analysis from the Single-Port Advanced Research Consortium (SPARC).

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the perioperative complications of single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on the prospectively maintained, Institutional Review Board-approved, multi-institutional Single-Port Advanced Research Consortium (SPARC) database. A total of 1103 patients were identified who underwent three different approaches of SP-RARP between 2019 and 2022 using the purpose-built SP robotic platform. In addition to baseline clinical, perioperative outcomes, this study comprehensively analysed for any evidence of intraoperative complication, as well as postoperative complication and readmission within 90 days of the respective surgery. RESULTS: Of the 244, 712, and 147 patients who underwent transperitoneal, extraperitoneal, and transvesical SP-RARP, respectively, intraoperative complications were noted in five patients (0.4%), all of which occurred during the transperitoneal approach. Two patients had bowel serosal tears, two had posterior button-holing of the bladder necessitating repair, and one patient had an obturator nerve injury. Postoperative complications were noted in 143 patients (13%) with major complications (Clavien-Dindo Grade ≥III) only identified in 3.7% of the total cohort. The most common complications were lymphocele (3.9%), acute urinary retention (2%), and urinary tract infection (1.9%). The 90-day re-admission rate was 3.9%. CONCLUSION: The SP-RARP is a safe and effective procedure with low complication and readmission rates regardless of the approach. These results are comparable to current multi-port RARP literature.

Low Risk of Postoperative Hernia Following Single-port Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Report From the Single-port Advanced Research Consortium (SPARC).

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk of postoperative hernia following different approaches of single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP). METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on patients who underwent SP-RARP between February 2019 and December 2022. Demographic and clinical information was collected from the multi-institutional, prospectively-maintained Single-Port Advanced Research Consortium (SPARC) database. Data were analyzed using IBM Statistical Packaging for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 29.0 with descriptive statistics as presented. RESULTS: A total of 1103 patients were identified, consisting of 244 (22.1%), 712 (64.6%), and 147 (13.3%) cases performed via transperitoneal, extraperitoneal (EP), and transvesical (TV) approaches, respectively. During a median follow-up time of 11 months (interquartile range 5.7-17.1 months), only two cases of incisional hernia were reported. Both cases occurred following transperitoneal SP-RARP with one patient requiring surgical repair. There remains no evidence of postoperative hernia following EP and TV SP-RARP at the completion of our review. CONCLUSION: SP-RARP was associated with low risk for postoperative hernia. The risk was lower following TV and EP SP-RARP where the peritoneum is preserved.

Building a Roadmap for Surveillance of Renal Masses Using a Modified Delphi Method to Help Achieve Consensus.

OBJECTIVE: To establish a consensus for initial evaluation and follow-up of patients on active surveillance (AS) for T1 renal masses (T1RM). METHODS: A modified Delphi method was used to gather information about AS of T1RM, with a focus on patient selection, timing/type of imaging modality, and triggers for intervention. A consensus panel of Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative-affiliated urologists who routinely manage renal masses was formed. Areas of consensus (defined >80% agreement) about T1RM AS were established iteratively via 3 rounds of online questionnaires. RESULTS: Twenty-six Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative urologists formed the panel. Consensus was achieved for 321/587 scenarios (54.7%) administered through 124 questions. Life expectancy, age, comorbidity, and renal function were most important for patient selection, with life expectancy ranking first. All tumors <3 cm and all patients with life expectancy <1 year were considered appropriate for AS. Appropriateness also increased with elevated perioperative risk, increasing tumor complexity, and/or declining renal function. Consensus was for multiphasic axial imaging initially (contrast CT for GFR >60 or MRI for GFR >30) with first repeat imaging at 3-6 months and subsequent imaging timing determined by tumor size. Consensus was for chest imaging for tumors >3 cm initially and >5 cm at follow up. Renal biopsy was not felt to be a requirement for entering AS, but useful in several scenarios. Consensus indicated rapid tumor growth as an appropriate trigger for intervention. CONCLUSION: Our consensus panel was able to achieve areas of consensus to help define a clinically useful and specific roadmap for AS of T1RM and areas for further discussion where consensus was not achieved.

Utilization of a Virtual Tumor Board for the Care of Patients With Renal Masses: Experience From a Quality Improvement Collaborative.

INTRODUCTION: Multidisciplinary tumor board meetings are useful sources of insight and collaboration when establishing treatment approaches for oncologic cases. However, such meetings can be time intensive and inconvenient. We implemented a virtual tumor board within the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative to discuss and improve the management of complicated renal masses. METHODS: Urologists were invited to discuss decision-making for renal masses through voluntary engagement. Communication was performed exclusively through email. Case details were collected and responses were tabulated. All participants were surveyed about their perceptions of the virtual tumor board. RESULTS: Fifty renal mass cases were reviewed in a virtual tumor board that included 53 urologists. Patients ranged from 20-90 years old and 94% had localized renal mass. The cases generated 355 messages, ranging from 2-16 (median 7) per case; 144 responses (40.6%) were sent via smartphone. All urologists (100%) who submitted to the virtual tumor board had their questions answered. The virtual tumor board provided suggestions to those with no stated treatment plan in 42% of cases, confirmed the physician's initial approach to their case in 36%, and offered alternative approaches in 16% of cases. Eighty-three percent of survey respondents felt the experience was "Beneficial" or "Very Beneficial," and 93% stated increased confidence in their case management. CONCLUSIONS: Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative's initial experience with a virtual tumor board showed good engagement. The format reduced barriers to multi-institutional and multi-disciplinary discussions and improved the quality of care for selected patients with complex renal masses.

Single Port Versus Multiport Robot-assisted Simple Prostatectomy: A Multi-institutional Study From the Single-port Advanced Research Consortium (SPARC).

OBJECTIVE: To compare robot-assisted simple prostatectomy intraoperative and postoperative.ßoutcomes between single-port (SP) and multiport (MP) robotic systems in a multi-institutional setting. METHODS: We analyzed all-consecutive robot-assisted simple prostatectomy cases done in 5 centers from January 2017 to October 2022. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and compared with appropriate tests depending on the type of variable and distribution. Statistical significance was considered when P.ß<.05. RESULTS: A total of 405 cases were analyzed:.ß249 and 156 were MP and SP, respectively. Operative times were similar between groups (P.ß=.ß.62). Estimated blood loss during surgery was significantly lower with the SP robot (P.ß<.001). Postoperatively, the SP approach required a significantly shorter hospital stay, less use of opioids, and a shorter duration of Foley catheter (P.ß<.001). There was no significant difference between the post-operative Clavien-Dindo ...3 complication rate (P.ß=.ß.30). The 30-day readmission rate of MP (10.8%) was significantly higher than for SP (0%) (P.ß<.001). De novo urge incontinence was more common in the MP group (P.ß=.ß.02). CONCLUSION: The SP robotic approach to simple prostatectomy is advantageous when it comes to postoperative comfort for patients. Specifically, it requires a shorter hospital stay, less use of opioids, and a shorter Foley catheter duration.

Initial Management of Indeterminate Renal Lesions in a Statewide Collaborative: A MUSIC-KIDNEY Analysis.

PURPOSE: Renal masses can be characterized as "indeterminate" due to lack of differentiating imaging characteristics. Optimal management of indeterminate renal lesions remains nebulous and poorly defined. We assess management of indeterminate renal lesions within the MUSIC-KIDNEY (Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative-Kidney mass: Identifying and Defining Necessary Evaluation and therapY) collaborative. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Each renal mass is classified as suspicious, benign, or indeterminate based on radiologist and urologist assessment. Objectives were to assess initial management of indeterminate renal lesions and the impact of additional imaging and biopsy on characterization prior to treatment. RESULTS: Of 2,109 patients, 444 (21.1%) had indeterminate renal lesions on their initial imaging, which included CT without contrast (36.2%), CT with contrast (54.1%), and MRI (9.7%). Eighty-nine patients (20.0%) underwent additional imaging within 90 days, 8.3% (37/444) underwent renal mass biopsy, and 3.6% (16/444) had reimaging and renal mass biopsy. Additional imaging reclassified 58.1% (61/105) of indeterminate renal lesions as suspicious and 21.0% (22/105) as benign, with only 20.9% (22/105) remaining indeterminate. Renal mass biopsy yielded a definitive diagnosis for 87%. Treatment was performed for 149 indeterminate renal lesions (33.6%), including 117 without reimaging and 123 without renal mass biopsy. At surgery for indeterminate renal lesions, benign pathology was more common in patients who did not have repeat imaging (9.9%) than in those who did (6.7%); for ≤4 cm indeterminate renal lesions, these rates were 11.8% and 4.3%. CONCLUSIONS: About 33% of patients diagnosed with an indeterminate renal lesion underwent immediate treatment without subsequent imaging or renal mass biopsy, with a 10% rate of nonmalignant pathology. This highlights a quality improvement opportunity for patients with cT1 renal masses: confirmation that the lesion is suspicious for renal cell carcinoma based on high-quality, multiphase, cross-sectional imaging and/or histopathological features prior to surgery, even if obtaining subsequent follow-up imaging and/or renal mass biopsy is necessary. When performed, these steps lead to reclassification in 79% and 87% of indeterminate renal lesions, respectively.