Skip to content

Oncological and Perioperative Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Partial Nephrectomy for Treatment of Renal Tumors.

Oncological and Perioperative Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Partial Nephrectomy for Treatment of Renal Tumors.

Status
Recruiting
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT06424080
Enrollment
20
Registered
2024-05-21
Start date
2024-05-01
Completion date
2025-12-01
Last updated
2024-06-04

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Renal Cell Carcinoma

Brief summary

partial nephrectomy offers lower renal function impairment and equivalent oncological survival outcomes compared with radical nephrectomy in those with T1 tumors. As urology has embraced the gradual shift from open to minimally invasive surgery (MIS), PN is being completed more often by laparoscopic and robotic methods . The first laparoscopic transperitoneal partial nephrectomy was reported in 1993 by Winfield, with the retroperitoneal approach introduced 1 year later With advancing robotic technology and the development of the DaVinci system, urologists began to explore the realm of robotic-assisted urologic surgery. In 2004, Gettman et al. published a paper describing their experience with robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Moreover, robotic assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) seems to be significantly better than OPN in terms of perioperative complications, estimated blood loss and hospital stay. Conversely, transfusion rate, ischemia time, change in estimated glomerular filtration rate and early cancer outcomes are similar between the two approaches. International guidelines recommend the use of both approaches according to the surgeon and patient preferences. so, we are plaining to do the study comparing between RAPN and LPN regarding feasibility and ability of both techniques.

Detailed description

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) represents a significant burden of malignancy. Over the past 2-3 decades, the incidence of kidney cancer has steadily increased all around the world ,.The EUA Guidelines suggested that surgery is the only curative treatment for localized renal cell carcinoma. Surgical treatment of RCC either radical or partial nephrectomy is related to the clinical stage of the disease and to the general condition of the patient. Modern medical imaging has further revolutionized the role of PN due to the increasing volume of incidentally diagnosed small renal masses. Indeed, partial nephrectomy offers lower renal function impairment and equivalent oncological survival outcomes compared with radical nephrectomy in those with T1 tumors. As urology has embraced the gradual shift from open to minimally invasive surgery (MIS), PN is being completed more often by laparoscopic and robotic methods . The first laparoscopic transperitoneal partial nephrectomy was reported in 1993 by Winfield, with the retroperitoneal approach introduced 1 year later With advancing robotic technology and the development of the DaVinci system, urologists began to explore the realm of robotic-assisted urologic surgery. In 2004, Gettman et al. published a paper describing their experience with robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Moreover, robotic assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) seems to be significantly better than OPN in terms of perioperative complications, estimated blood loss and hospital stay. Conversely, transfusion rate, ischemia time, change in estimated glomerular filtration rate and early cancer outcomes are similar between the two approaches. International guidelines recommend the use of both approaches according to the surgeon and patient preferences. so, we are plaining to do the study comparing between RAPN and LPN regarding feasibility and ability of both techniques.

Interventions

cases amenable for partial nephrectomy

cases amenable for partial nephrectomy

Sponsors

Menoufia University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* renal mass T1 according to TNM amenable for partial nephrectomy.

Exclusion criteria

* any unfit pt for partial nephrectomy * more than 7cm tumor * mass not amenable for partial nephrectomy * metastatic tumor or locally advanced

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
to compare between laparoscopic and robotic partial nephrectomy regards ischemia time1 yearto compare between laparoscopic and robotic partial nephrectomy regards ischemia time

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
compare between laparoscopic and robotic partial nephrectomy pathological safty margin1 yearcompare between laparoscopic and robotic partial nephrectomy pathological safty margin

Countries

Egypt

Contacts

Primary Contacthossam elsayed kandeel, MSC
hossamkandeel016@gmail.com01097991198

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026