Complications after robotic partial nephrectomy at centers of excellence: Multi-institutional analysis of 450 cases

Gregory Spana, Georges Pascal Haber, Lori M. Dulabon, Firas Petros, Craig G. Rogers, Sam B. Bhayani, Michael D. Stifelman, Jihad H. Kaouk

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

91 Scopus citations

Abstract

Purpose: We evaluated the incidence of perioperative complications after robotic partial nephrectomy. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients treated with robotic assisted partial nephrectomy across the 4 participating institutions. Demographic, blood loss, warm ischemia time, and intraoperative and postoperative complication data were collected. All complications were graded according to the Clavien classification system. Results: A total of 450 consecutive robotic assisted partial nephrectomies were done between June 2006 and May 2009. Overall 71 patients (15.8%) had a complication, including intraoperative and postoperative complications in 8 (1.8%) and 65 (14.4%), respectively. Hemorrhage developed in 2 patients (0.2%) intraoperatively and in 22 (4.9%) postoperatively. Seven patients (1.6%) had urine leakage. As classified by the Clavien system, complications were grade I-II in 76.1% of cases and grade III-IV in 23.9%. Robotic assisted partial nephrectomy was converted to open or conventional laparoscopic surgery in 3 patients (0.7%) and to radical nephrectomy in 7 (1.6%). There were no deaths. Conclusions: Current data indicate that robotic assisted partial nephrectomy is safe. Most postoperative complications are Clavien grade I or II, or can be managed conservatively.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)417-422
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Urology
Volume186
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2011

Keywords

  • kidney
  • kidney neoplasms
  • laparoscopy
  • nephrectomy
  • robotics

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Complications after robotic partial nephrectomy at centers of excellence: Multi-institutional analysis of 450 cases'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this