oncological and perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic versus robotic partial nephrectomy for treatment of renal tumors.

Conditions: Renal Cell Carcinoma

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.

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.

Eligibility criteria:
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