Purpose To compare the safety of on- vs off-clamp robotic partial nephrectomy (RAPN). Methods 302 patients with RENAL masses <= 10 were randomized to undergo on-clamp (150) vs off-clamp (152) RAPN (CLOCK trial-ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02287987) at seven institutions by one experienced surgeon per institution. Intra-operative data, complications, and positive surgical margins were compared. Results Due to a relevant rate of shift from the assigned treatment, the per-protocol analysis only was considered and the data from 129 on-clamp vs 91 off-clamp RAPNs analyzed. Tumor size (off-clamp vs on-clamp, 2.2 vs 3.0 cm, p < 0.001) and RENAL score (5 vs 6, p < 0.001) significantly differed. At univariate analysis, no differences were found regarding intra-operative estimated blood loss (off- vs on-clamp, 100 vs 100 ml, p = 0.7), post-operative complications rate (19% vs 26%, p = 0.2), post-operative anemia (Hb decrease > 2.5 g/dl 26% vs 27%, p = 0.9; transfusion rate 3.4% vs 6.3%, p = 0.5; re-intervention due to bleeding 1.1% vs 4%, p = 0.4), acute kidney injury (4% vs 6%, p = 0.8), and positive surgical margins (3.5% vs 8.2%, p = 0.1). At multivariate analysis accounting for tumor diameter and complexity, considering the on-clamp group as the reference category, a significant difference was noted in the off-clamp group exclusively for blood loss (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.09-0.52, p = 0.008). Conclusions The on-clamp and off-clamp approaches for RAPN showed a comparable safety profile.

Safety of on- vs off-clamp robotic partial nephrectomy: per-protocol analysis from the data of the CLOCK randomized trial

Antonelli, A.;Bertolo, R.;De Concilio, B.;
2020-01-01

Abstract

Purpose To compare the safety of on- vs off-clamp robotic partial nephrectomy (RAPN). Methods 302 patients with RENAL masses <= 10 were randomized to undergo on-clamp (150) vs off-clamp (152) RAPN (CLOCK trial-ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02287987) at seven institutions by one experienced surgeon per institution. Intra-operative data, complications, and positive surgical margins were compared. Results Due to a relevant rate of shift from the assigned treatment, the per-protocol analysis only was considered and the data from 129 on-clamp vs 91 off-clamp RAPNs analyzed. Tumor size (off-clamp vs on-clamp, 2.2 vs 3.0 cm, p < 0.001) and RENAL score (5 vs 6, p < 0.001) significantly differed. At univariate analysis, no differences were found regarding intra-operative estimated blood loss (off- vs on-clamp, 100 vs 100 ml, p = 0.7), post-operative complications rate (19% vs 26%, p = 0.2), post-operative anemia (Hb decrease > 2.5 g/dl 26% vs 27%, p = 0.9; transfusion rate 3.4% vs 6.3%, p = 0.5; re-intervention due to bleeding 1.1% vs 4%, p = 0.4), acute kidney injury (4% vs 6%, p = 0.8), and positive surgical margins (3.5% vs 8.2%, p = 0.1). At multivariate analysis accounting for tumor diameter and complexity, considering the on-clamp group as the reference category, a significant difference was noted in the off-clamp group exclusively for blood loss (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.09-0.52, p = 0.008). Conclusions The on-clamp and off-clamp approaches for RAPN showed a comparable safety profile.
2020
Partial nephrectomy
Robot
Clamping
On-clamp
Off-clamp
Clampless
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
clock wju.pdf

accesso aperto

Licenza: Dominio pubblico
Dimensione 930.86 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
930.86 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11562/1032202
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 33
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 33
social impact