Abstract
ObjectiveRobot-assisted partial nephrectomy is increasingly being performed; however, its benefits compared with those of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy remain controversial. This study aimed to compare the differences between robot-assisted partial nephrectomy and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in the treatment of renal tumors.MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 74 patients who underwent partial nephrectomy between January 2022 and February 2024. Of these, 68 patients with a postoperative pathological diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma and complete clinical data were included. Clinical, perioperative, and follow-up data were collected to compare the therapeutic outcomes between the robot-assisted partial nephrectomy and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy groups.ResultsThe average warm ischemia time was significantly shorter in the robot-assisted partial nephrectomy group (18.80 ± 3.49 vs. 21.02 ± 3.68 min, p = 0.044), with lesser intraoperative blood loss (15.47 ± 6.91 vs. 74.06 ± 112.60 mL, p = 0.049). The positive surgical margin rates in the robot-assisted partial nephrectomy and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy groups were 0% and 1.89%, respectively, with no significant difference (p = 0.592). No patients experienced complications greater than Clavien-Dindo grade III.ConclusionCompared with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy, robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for renal tumors results in a shorter warm ischemia time and reduced intraoperative blood loss.