The application of internal suspension technique in retroperitoneal robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy with a new robotic system KangDuo Surgical Robot-01: Initial experience
Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Xicheng District, Beijing, China
Objective: To assess the feasibility of internal suspension technique in retroperitoneal robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (rRAPN) with a new robotic platform called KangDuo Surgical Robot-01 (KD-SR-01) system (Suzhou KangDuo Robot Co., Ltd., Suzhou, China) and discuss its surgical technique.
Methods: A 44-year-old male patient was admitted with a 2.5 cm tumor on dorsolateral upper pole of the left kidney. The R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score of this patient was 4x. This patient underwent rRAPN with KD-SR-01. The perinephric fat between the tumor and Gerota's fascia was preserved, which was used for internal suspension traction during tumor resection. Postoperative follow-up data were collected.
Results: The surgery was successfully carried out with a duration of 127 min, in which the docking time was 6 min 25 s and console time was 60 min. The warm ischemia time was 19 min 53 s, and the estimated blood loss was 0 mL. The pathological histology showed a pathological tumor stage 1a clear cell renal cell carcinoma, with a negative surgical margin. The World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology (WHO/ISUP) grade of this patient was Grade 2. No recurrence was observed during the 6-month follow-up.
Conclusion: Internal suspension in rRAPN is feasible and effective with use of the new robotic system KD-SR-01.
. [J]. Asian Journal of Urology, 2023, 10(4): 482-487.
Silu Chen, Shubo Fan, Hua Guan, Kunlin Yang, Zhihua Li, Shengwei Xiong, Xiang Wang, Zhenyu Li, Cheng Shen, Liqun Zhou, Xuesong Li. The application of internal suspension technique in retroperitoneal robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy with a new robotic system KangDuo Surgical Robot-01: Initial experience. Asian Journal of Urology, 2023, 10(4): 482-487.
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin 2022; 72:7-33.
doi: 10.3322/caac.v72.1
[2]
MacLennan S, Imamura M, Lapitan MC, Omar MI, Lam TBL, Hilvano-Cabungcal AM, et al. Systematic review of oncological outcomes following surgical management of localised renal cancer. Eur Urol 2012; 61:972-93.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.02.039
pmid: 22405593
[3]
Alam R, Patel HD, Osumah T, Srivastava A, Gorin MA, Johnson MH, et al. Comparative effectiveness of management options for patients with small renal masses: a prospective cohort study. BJU Int 2019; 123:42-50.
doi: 10.1111/bju.14490
pmid: 30019484
[4]
Capitanio U, Terrone C, Antonelli A, Minervini A, Volpe A, Furlan M, et al. Nephron-sparing techniques independently decrease the risk of cardiovascular events relative to radical nephrectomy in patients with a T1aeT1b renal mass and normal preoperative renal function. Eur Urol 2015; 67:683-9.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.09.027
pmid: 25282367
[5]
Amparore D, Pecoraro A, Piramide F, Checcucci E, De Cillis S, Volpi G, et al. Comparison between minimally-invasive partial and radical nephrectomy for the treatment of clinical T2 renal masses: results of a 10 -year study in a tertiary care center. Minerva Urol Nephrol 2021; 73:509-17.
doi: 10.23736/S2724-6051.21.04390-1
pmid: 33887896
[6]
Carbonara U, Simone G, Capitanio U, Minervini A, Fiori C, Larcher A, et al. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: 7-year outcomes. Minerva Urol Nephrol 2021; 73:540-3.
doi: 10.23736/S2724-6051.20.04151-X
pmid: 33200907
[7]
Simone G, Tuderti G, Anceschi U, Papalia R, Ferriero M, Misuraca L, et al. Oncological outcomes of minimally invasive partial versus minimally invasive radical nephrectomy for cT1- 2/N0/M0 clear cell renal cell carcinoma: a propensity scorematched analysis. World J Urol 2017; 35:789-94.
doi: 10.1007/s00345-016-1923-2
[8]
Ljungberg B, Albiges L, Abu-Ghanem Y, Bedke J, Capitanio U, Dabestani S, et al. European Association of Urology guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: the 2022 update. Eur Urol 2022; 82: 399-410.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.03.006
pmid: 35346519
[9]
Chang KD, Abdel Raheem A, Kim KH, Oh CK, Park SY, Kim YS, et al. Functional and oncological outcomes of open, laparoscopic and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a multicentre comparative matched-pair analyses with a median of 5 years’ follow-up. BJU Int 2018; 122:618-26.
doi: 10.1111/bju.14250
pmid: 29645344
[10]
Li X, Xu W, Fan S, Xiong S, Dong J, Wang J, et al. Robotassisted partial nephrectomy with the newly developed KangDuo surgical robot versus the da Vinci Si Surgical System: a double-center prospective randomized controlled noninferiority trial. Eur Urol Focus 2023; 9:133-40.
[11]
Fan S, Dai X, Yang K, Xiong S, Xiong G, Li Z, et al. Robotassisted pyeloplasty using a new robotic system, the KangDuo- Surgical Robot-01: a prospective, single-centre, single-arm clinical study. BJU Int 2021; 128:162-5.
doi: 10.1111/bju.v128.2
[12]
Fan S, Xiong S, Li Z, Yang K, Wang J, Han G, et al. Pyeloplasty with the KangDuo surgical robot vs. the da Vinci Si robotic system: preliminary results. J Endourol 2022; 35:1538-44.
[13]
Fan S, Zhang Z, Wang J, Xiong S, Dai X, Chen X, et al. Robotassisted radical prostatectomy using the KangDuo Surgical Robot-01 System: a prospective, single-center, single-arm clinical study. J Urol 2022; 208:119-27.
doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000002498
[14]
Patel P, Nayak JG, Liu Z, Saarela O, Jewett M, Rendon R, et al. A multicentered, propensity matched analysis comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for pT3a renal cell carcinoma. J Endourol 2017; 31:645-50.
doi: 10.1089/end.2016.0787
pmid: 28381117
[15]
Fan X, Xu K, Lin T, Liu H, Yin Z, Dong W, et al. Comparison of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and metaanalysis. BJU Int 2013; 111:611-21.
doi: 10.1111/bju.2013.111.issue-4
[16]
Choo SH, Lee SY, Sung HH, Jeon HG, Jeong BC, Jeon SS, et al. Transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy: matched-pair comparisons by nephrometry scores. World J Urol 2014; 32:1523-9.
doi: 10.1007/s00345-014-1312-7
pmid: 24817141
[17]
Dai X, Fan S, Hao H, Yang K, Shen C, Xiong G, et al. Comparison of KD-SR-01 robotic partial nephrectomy and 3D-laparoscopic partial nephrectomy from an operative and ergonomic perspective: a prospective randomized controlled study in porcine models. Int J Med Robot 2021; 17: e2187. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.2187.
doi: 10.1002/rcs.v17.2
[18]
Wang J, Fan S, Shen C, Yang K, Li Z, Xiong S, et al. Partial nephrectomy through retroperitoneal approach with a new surgical robot system, KD-SR-01. Int J Med Robot 2022; 18: e2352. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.2352.
doi: 10.1002/rcs.v18.2
[19]
Zhong W, Du Y, Zhang L, Li X, Zhang C, Fang D, et al. The application of internal suspension technique in retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal ventral tumors. BioMed Res Int 2017; 2017:1849649. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/1849649.
[20]
MacLennan S, Imamura M, Lapitan MC, Omar MI, Lam TBL, Hilvano-Cabungcal AM, et al. Systematic review of perioperative and quality-of-life outcomes following surgical management of localised renal cancer. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 1097-117.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.07.028
pmid: 22841673
[21]
Tuderti G, Brassetti A, Mastroianni R, Misuraca L, Bove A, Anceschi U, et al. Expanding the limits of nephron-sparing surgery: surgical technique and mid-term outcomes of purely off-clamp robotic partial nephrectomy for totally endophytic renal tumors. Int J Urol 2022; 29:282-8.
doi: 10.1111/iju.14763
pmid: 34973156
[22]
Simone G, Capitanio U, Tuderti G, Presicce F, Leonardo C, Ferriero M, et al. On-clamp versus off-clamp partial nephrectomy: propensity score-matched comparison of longterm functional outcomes. Int J Urol 2019; 26:985-91.
doi: 10.1111/iju.v26.10
[23]
Simone G, Misuraca L, Tuderti G, Minisola F, Ferriero M, Romeo G, et al. Purely off-clamp robotic partial nephrectomy: preliminary 3-year oncological and functional outcomes. Int J Urol 2018; 25:606-14.
doi: 10.1111/iju.13580
pmid: 29663528
[24]
Peyronnet B, Seisen T, Oger E, Vaessen C, Grassano Y, Benoit T, et al. Comparison of 1800 robotic and open partial nephrectomies for renal tumors. Ann Surg Oncol 2016; 23:4277-83.
pmid: 27411552
[25]
Masson-Lecomte A, Bensalah K, Seringe E, Vaessen C, de la Taille A, Doumerc N, et al. A prospective comparison of surgical and pathological outcomes obtained after robot-assisted or pure laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in moderate to complex renal tumours: results from a French multicentre collaborative study. BJU Int 2013; 111:256-63.
doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11528.x
pmid: 23279002
[26]
Harke NN, Darr C, Radtke JP, von Ostau N, Schiefelbein F, Eraky A, et al. Retroperitoneal versus transperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy: a multicenter matched-pair analysis. Eur Urol Focus 2021; 7:1363-70.
doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.08.012
pmid: 32912841
[27]
Feliciano J, Stifelman M. Robotic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy: a four-arm approach. J Soc Laparoendosc Surg 2012; 16:208-11.
doi: 10.4293/108680812X13427982376149
[28]
Jiang XL, OuYang K, Yang R, Yu XY, Yang DD, Wu JT, et al. The application of internal traction technique in retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for renal ventral tumors. World J Surg Oncol 2022; 20:213. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-022-02684-1.
doi: 10.1186/s12957-022-02684-1
[29]
Rod X, Peyronnet B, Seisen T, Pradere B, Gomez FD, Verhoest G, et al. Impact of ischaemia time on renal function after partial nephrectomy: a systematic review. BJU Int 2016; 118:692-705.
doi: 10.1111/bju.13580
pmid: 27409986
