Download PDF
Urologie Scan 2016; 03(04): 299-313
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-114149
Fortbildung
Uroonkologie der Niere
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Aktueller Stand der roboterassistierten partiellen Nephrektomie

Bernd Rosenhammer
,
Stefan Denzinger
,
Johannes Bründl
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
01 December 2016 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Roboterassistierte Operationsverfahren sind seit Einführung der roboterassistierten radikalen Prostatektomie stark im Vormarsch. Stetige technische Weiterentwicklungen der letzten Jahre scheinen die Nachteile der konventionellen Laparoskopie insbesondere bei komplexen chirurgischen Situationen aufheben zu können. Die partielle Nephrektomie hat sich, sofern aus tumoranatomischer Sicht möglich, in den letzten Jahren zum Standardeingriff beim organbegrenzten Nierentumor entwickelt. Der aktuelle Stellenwert der roboterassistierten Teilnephrektomie im Vergleich zu den etablierten operativen Verfahren soll im Folgenden dargestellt werden. Hierzu soll zunächst ein Abriss der wichtigsten Fakten zur Indikationsstellung gegeben werden, anschließend soll die operative Technik im Detail vorgestellt werden. Anhand von einigen aktuellen Daten sollen abschließend die möglichen Vor- und Nachteile der Methode im Vergleich zur konventionell laparoskopischen Nierenteilresektion erörtert und bewertet werden.

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Robert Koch Institut. Zentrum für Krebsregisterdaten. Nierenkrebs. Im Internet: http://www.krebsdaten.de/Krebs/DE/Content/Krebsarten/Nierenkrebs/nierenkrebs_node.html [Stand: 01.08.2016]
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft, Deutsche Krebshilfe, AWMF): S3-Leitlinie Diagnostik, Therapie und Nachsorge des Nierenzellkarzinoms. Langversion 1.0; AWMF-Registernummer 043/017-OL. 09/2015
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Binder J, Kramer W. Robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2001; 87: 408-410
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Gilfrich C, Brookman-May S, May M et al. Die roboterassistierte radikale Prostatektomie. Literaturreview zum onkologischen und funktionellen Outcome. Urologie Scan 2014; 1: 49-68
    Article in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Hemal AK, Kumar A, Kumar R et al. Laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy for large renal tumors: a long-term prospective comparison. J Urol 2007; 177: 862-866
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Tait C, Tandon S, Baker L et al. Long-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for kidney cancer resection: Dundee cohort and metaanalysis of observational studies. Surg Endosc 2011; 25: 3154-3161
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Gratzke C, Seitz M, Bayrle F et al. Quality of life and perioperative outcomes after retroperitoneoscopic radical nephrectomy (RN), open RN and nephron-sparing surgery in patients with renal cell carcinoma. BJU Int 2009; 104: 470-475
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Peng B, Zheng JH, Xu DF et al. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy and open nephrectomy for radical treatment of renal cell carcinoma: A comparison of clinical outcomes. Acad J Sec Milit Med Univers 2006; 27: 1167-1169
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Huang WC, Elkin EB, Levey AS et al. Partial nephrectomy versus radical nephrectomy in patients with small renal tumors – is there a difference in mortality and cardiovascular outcomes?. J Urol 2009; 181: 55-62
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Butler BP, Novick AC, Miller DP et al. Management of small unilateral renal cell carcinomas: radical versus nephron-sparing surgery. Urology 1995; 45: 34-41
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Lee JH, You CH, Min GE et al. Comparison of the surgical outcome and renal function between radical and nephron-sparing surgery for renal cell carcinomas. Korean J Urol 2007; 48: 671-676
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Gill IS, Kavoussi LR, Lane BR et al. Comparison of 1,800 laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomies for single renal tumors. J Urol 2007; 178: 41-46
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Lane BR, Gill IS. 7-year oncological outcomes after laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy. J Urol 2010; 183: 473-479
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Gong EM, Orvieto MA, Zorn KC et al. Comparison of laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy in clinical T1a renal tumors. J Endourol 2008; 22: 953-957
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Marszalek M, Meixl H, Polajnar M et al. Laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy: a matched-pair comparison of 200 patients. Eur Urol 2009; 55: 1171-1178
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Van Poppel H, Becker F, Cadeddu JA et al. Treatment of localised renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 2011; 60: 662-672
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Ljungberg B, Bensalah K, Canfield S et al. EAU guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: 2014 update. Eur Urol 2015; 67: 913-924
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Abouassaly R, Alibhai SM, Tomlinson G et al. Unintended consequences of laparoscopic surgery on partial nephrectomy for kidney cancer. J Urol 2010; 183: 467-472
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Janetschek G. [Partial nephrectomy – pro laparoscopy]. Urologe A 2012; 51: 646-649
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Mottrie A, De Naeyer G, Schatteman P et al. Impact of the learning curve on perioperative outcomes in patients who underwent robotic partial nephrectomy for parenchymal renal tumours. Eur Urol 2010; 58: 127-132
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Kaul S, Laungani R, Sarle R et al. da Vinci-assisted robotic partial nephrectomy: technique and results at a mean of 15 months of follow-up. Eur Urol 2007; 51: 186-191
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Patel MN, Bhandari M, Menon M et al. Robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy: Has it come of age?. Indian J Urol 2009; 25: 523-528
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 23 DeLong JM, Shapiro O, Moinzadeh A. Comparison of laparoscopic versus robotic assisted partial nephrectomy: one surgeonʼs initial experience. Can J Urol 2010; 17: 5207-5212
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Andrade HS, Zargar H, Caputo PA et al. Five-year Oncologic Outcomes After Transperitoneal Robotic Partial Nephrectomy for Renal Cell Carcinoma. Eur Urol 2016; 69: 1149-1154
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Aboumarzouk OM, Stein RJ, Eyraud R et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 1023-1033
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Zhang X, Shen Z, Zhong S et al. Comparison of perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted vs laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a meta-analysis. BJU Int 2013; 112: 1133-1142
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Reyes JM, Smaldone MC, Uzzo RG et al. Current status of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. Curr Urol Rep 2012; 13: 24-37
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Gorin MA, Ball MW, Pierorazio PM et al. Outcomes and predictors of clinical T1 to pathological T3a tumor up-staging after robotic partial nephrectomy: a multi-institutional analysis. J Urol 2013; 190: 1907-1911
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Roos FC, Thomas C, Neisius A et al. Robotisch assistierte laparoskopische partielle Nephrektomie. Funktionelle und onkologische Ergebnisse. Urologe 2015; 54: 213-218
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Ficarra V, Novara G, Secco S et al. Preoperative aspects and dimensions used for an anatomical (PADUA) classification of renal tumours in patients who are candidates for nephron-sparing surgery. Eur Urol 2009; 56: 786-793
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Kutikov A, Uzzo RG. The R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score: a comprehensive standardized system for quantitating renal tumor size, location and depth. J Urol 2009; 182: 844-853
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Khalifeh A, Autorino R, Hillyer SP et al. Comparative outcomes and assessment of trifecta in 500 robotic and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy cases: a single surgeon experience. J Urol 2013; 189: 1236-1242
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Choi JE, You JH, Kim DK et al. Comparison of perioperative outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2015; 67: 891-901
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Zargar H, Allaf ME, Bhayani S et al. Trifecta and optimal perioperative outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in surgical treatment of small renal masses: a multi-institutional study. BJU Int 2015; 116: 407-414
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Kim DK, Kim LH, Raheem AA et al. Comparison of Trifecta and Pentafecta Outcomes between T1a and T1b Renal Masses following Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy (RAPN) with Minimum One Year Follow Up: Can RAPN for T1b Renal Masses Be Feasible?. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0151738
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Lee C, Kwon T, Yoo S et al. Comparison of Renal Function between Robot-Assisted and Open Partial Nephrectomy as Determined by Tc 99m-DTPA Renal Scintigraphy. J Korean Med Sci 2016; 31: 743-749
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Porpiglia F, Mari A, Bertolo R et al. Partial Nephrectomy in Clinical T1b Renal Tumors: Multicenter Comparative Study of Open, Laparoscopic and Robot-assisted Approach (the RECORd Project). Urology 2016; 89: 45-53
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar