Robotic versus open partial nephrectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PLoS ONE

Volumn 9, Issue 4, 2014, Pages

  Wu, Zhenjie ^a   Li, Mingmin ^a   Liu, Bing ^a   Cai, Chen ^a   Ye, Huamao ^a   Lv, Chen ^a   Yang, Qing ^a   Sheng, Jing ^a   Song, Shangqing ^a   Qu, Le ^a   Xiao, Liang ^a   Sun, Yinghao ^a   Wang, Linhui ^a  

^a SECOND MILITARY MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BLOOD TRANSFUSION; BODY MASS; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; GLOMERULUS FILTRATION RATE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; ISCHEMIA; KIDNEY TUMOR; LENGTH OF STAY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; META ANALYSIS; METASTASIS POTENTIAL; NEPHRON SPARING SURGERY; OPEN PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMY; OPERATION DURATION; OPERATIVE BLOOD LOSS; PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMY; PEROPERATIVE COMPLICATION; REVIEW; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TUMOR RECURRENCE; TUMOR VOLUME;

EID: 84925556187     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0094878     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. Ljungberg B, Bensalah K, Bex A, Canfield S, Dabestani S, et al. (2013) Guidelines on Renal Cell Carcinoma. Uroweb 2013. Available: http://www.uroweb.org/gls/pdf/10-Renal-Cell-Carcinoma-LRV2.pdf Accessed November 30, 2013.
2. MacLennan S, Imamura M, Lapitan MC, Omar MI, Lam TB, et al. (2012) Systematic review of oncological outcomes following surgical management of localised renal cancer. Eur Urol 61: 972-993.
3. Tan HJ, Norton EC, Ye Z, Hafez KS, Gore JL, et al. (2012) Long-term survival following partial vs radical nephrectomy among older patients with early-stage kidney cancer. JAMA 307: 1629-1635.
4. Sun M, Bianchi M, Hansen J, Trinh QD, Abdollah F, et al. (2012) Chronic kidney disease after nephrectomy in patients with small renal masses: A retrospective observational analysis. Eur Urol 62: 696-703.
5. Abouassaly R, Alibhai SM, Tomlinson G, Timilshina N, Finelli A (2010) Unintended consequences of laparoscopic surgery on partial nephrectomy for kidney cancer. J Urol 183: 467-472.
6. Aboumarzouk OM, Stein RJ, Eyraud R, Haber GP, Chlosta PL, et al. (2012) Robotic versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: A systematic review and metaanalysis. Eur Urol 62: 1023-1033.
7. Dulabon LM, Kaouk JH, Haber GP, Berkman DS, Rogers CG, et al. (2011) Multi-institutional analysis of robotic partial nephrectomy for hilar versus nonhilar lesions in 446 consecutive cases. Eur Urol 59: 325-330.
8. Gong Y, Du C, Josephson DY, Wilson TG, Nelson R (2010) Four-arm robotic partial nephrectomy for complex renal cell carcinoma. World J Urol 28: 111- 115.
9. Sprenkle PC, Power N, Ghoneim T, Touijer KA, Dalbagni G, et al. (2012)Comparison of open and minimally invasive partial nephrectomy for renal tumors 4-7 centimeters. Eur Urol 61: 593-599.
10. Lee S, Oh J, Hong SK, Lee SE, Byun SS (2011) Open versus robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: effect on clinical outcome. J Endourol 25: 1181-1185.
11. Masson-Lecomte A, Yates DR, Hupertan V, Haertig A, Chartier-Kastler E, et al. (2013) A prospective comparison of the pathologic and surgical outcomes obtained after elective treatment of renal cell carcinoma by open or robotassisted partial nephrectomy. Urol Oncol 31: 924-929.
12. Minervini A, Vittori G, Antonelli A, Celia A, Crivellaro S, et al. (2013) Open versus robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy: A multicenter comparison study of perioperative results and complications. World J Urol.
13. Simhan J, Smaldone MC, Tsai KJ, Li T, Reyes JM, et al. (2012) Perioperative outcomes of robotic and open partial nephrectomy for moderately and highly complex renal lesions. J Urol 187: 2000-2004.
14. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: A new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240: 205-213.
15. Seveso M, Taverna GL, Maffezzini M, Giusti G, Benetti A, et al. (2002) [Nephron-sparing surgery. Reproducibility of results, personal cases, and comparison with the international literature]. Arch Ital Urol Androl 74: 65-68.
16. Kjaergard LL, Villumsen J, Gluud C (2001) Reported methodologic quality and discrepancies between large and small randomized trials in meta-analyses. Ann Intern Med 135: 982-989.
17. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, et al. (1996) Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 17: 1-12.
18. Moher D, Pham B, Jones A, Cook DJ, Jadad AR, et al. (1998) Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet 352: 609-613.
19. Wells GA, Shea B, O'Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, et al. (Available from:http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical-epidemiology/oxford.aspAccessed July 20, 2012) The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality if nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses.
20. Fan X, Lin T, Xu K, Yin Z, Huang H, et al. (2012) Laparoendoscopic single-site nephrectomy compared with conventional laparoscopic nephrectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol 62: 601-612.
21. Hozo SP, Djulbegovic B, Hozo I (2005) Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample. BMC Med Res Methodol 5: 13.
22. JPT H, S G. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, v.5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. Available from Cochrane Collaboration Web site. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org/.
23. Mantel N, Haenszel W (1959) Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst 22: 719-748.
24. DerSimonian R, Laird N (1986) Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 7: 177-188.
25. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG (2003) Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 327: 557-560.
26. Alemozaffar M, Chang SL, Kacker R, Sun M, DeWolf WC, et al. (2013) Comparing costs of robotic, laparoscopic, and open partial nephrectomy. J Endourol 27: 560-565.
27. Laydner H, Isac W, Autorino R, Kassab A, Yakoubi R, et al. (2013) Single institutional cost analysis of 325 robotic, laparoscopic, and open partial nephrectomies. Urology 81: 533-538.
28. Lucas SM, Mellon MJ, Erntsberger L, Sundaram CP (2012) A comparison of robotic, laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy. Jsls 16: 581-587.
29. Yu HY, Hevelone ND, Lipsitz SR, Kowalczyk KJ, Hu JC (2012) Use, costs and comparative effectiveness of robotic assisted, laparoscopic and open urological surgery. J Urol 187: 1392-1398.
30. Kaouk JH, Khalifeh A, Hillyer S, Haber GP, Stein RJ, et al. (2012) Robotassisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: step-by-step contemporary technique and surgical outcomes at a single high-volume institution. Eur Urol 62: 553-561.
31. Haseebuddin M, Benway BM, Cabello JM, Bhayani SB (2010) Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: evaluation of learning curve for an experienced renal surgeon. J Endourol 24: 57-61.
32. Winfield HN, Donovan JF, Godet AS, Clayman RV (1993) Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: initial case report for benign disease. J Endourol 7: 521-526.
33. Gettman MT, Blute ML, Chow GK, Neururer R, Bartsch G, et al. (2004) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: Technique and initial clinical experience with DaVinci robotic system. Urology 64: 914-918.