Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Nowadays robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) represents the standard of care for clinical T1 (cT1) renal masses, providing similar oncological outcomes when compared to open or laparoscopic PN with advantages in terms of functional outcomes and lower perioperative comorbidity, when compared to radical nephrectomy. METHODS: We performed an extensive literature review of studies regarding RAPN, its evolution, technical aspects and applications, and new technological tools using different combinations of Medical Subject Headings terms "RAPN", "partial nephrectomy", "robot-assisted", "nephron-sparing surgery", "renal cell carcinoma", "complex renal masses", "endophytic renal masses", and "bilateral renal tumors". RESULTS: A consistent body of evidence was selected, including original articles, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and clinical trials having RAPN as the central focus in adult patients, with all its technical nuances. We started our narrative review with a background on PN and its evolution toward the robotic era with a special spotlight on the extending indications for PN in large and highly complex renal masses. Our review continued with an overview of nephron-sparing surgery in bilateral and recurrent masses. RAPN for bilateral synchronous renal masses represents a challenging scenario with no formal recommendations provided by international guidelines and controversial management and decision-making. Additionally, we reported evidence on redo RAPN which seems to be safe and effective. A final overview of the available technological tools, and in particular on three-dimensional reconstruction was provided. CONCLUSION: RAPN has been established as the standard of care for cT1 renal masses with an expanding spectrum of applications in different scenarios, including large (cT2), highly complex, and bilateral renal masses, as well as the surgical treatment of local recurrences after nephron-sparing surgery with acknowledged advantages in terms of functional outcomes and perioperative risk profiles while maintaining similar oncological outcomes when compared to open or laparoscopic PN and radical treatment.