Running suture hemostatic technique versus standard reconstruction of the surgical bed in Zero - Ischemia Time mini-flank Open Partial Nephrectomies. Retrospective, Match-Paired Case-Control Study

• Main Authors: Petar Kavaric, Aleksandar Magdelinic, Marko Vukovic
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: PAGEPress Publications 2019-07-01
• Series: Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia
• Subjects: Nephrectomy; Ischemia time; Hemostatic technique
• Online Access: https://www.pagepressjournals.org/index.php/aiua/article/view/8104

Objective: To estimate the efficacy of our technique of zero ischemia time partial nephrectomy (ZTPN) with hemostatic running suture and compare it to the standard technique, in terms of perioperative complications, operative time (OT) and estimated blood loss (EBL). Materials and methods: We retrospectively analysed 180 consecutive patients who underwent ZTPN using a supra 11th or supra 12th rib mini flank approach. First group numbered 90 patients treated with running suture hemostatic technique (RSHT), while the control group enrolled 90 patients in whom we performed standard reconstruction technique (SRT). According the propensity score, both groups were similar in terms of tumor size, age and PADUA score. Patients with solitary tumour limited to the kidney (T1-T2a) were included. Our technique included a running suture of surgical bed edges and closure of the renal cortex by the positioning of peri-renal fat within the cortical bed and fixation with interrupted sutures. Results: PADUA score and tumor size were comparable between groups (7.12 ± 1.33 vs 7.1 ± 2.11, p = 0.4 and 52.9 ± 14.8 vs 50.0 ± 13.2, p = 0.3). The mean operative time (OT) was significantly longer in first group (165.2 vs 95, p = 0.04), while median estimated blood loss (EBL) was significantly reduced (250 vs 460 ml, p = 0.02). Surgical resection margins were negative in 100% of cases and no patient developed a local or distant recurrence during follow up. There was significant difference in postoperative GFR value between groups (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Our technique could be safely performed in local, low volume facilities, thus reducing the need for expensive and more challenging minimal invasive surgical techniques..