Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 10, 2026
Single Port Donor Nephrectomy
Published on: March 12, 2011
Robotic versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: single-surgeon matched cohort study of 150 patients
Georges-Pascal Haber1, Wesley M White, Sebastien Crouzet
1Section of Laparoscopic and Robotic Urologic Surgery, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio 44195, USA.
Objectives:
To present comparative outcomes among matched patients who underwent robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) or laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) by a single surgeon at a single institution.
Methods:
Between March 2002 and August 2009, a retrospective review of 261 consecutive patients who underwent LPN (n = 186) or RPN (n = 75) by a single surgeon was performed. Patients were matched for age, gender, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, and tumor size, side, and location. Perioperative outcomes were compared.
Results:
A matched cohort of 150 patients who underwent RPN (n = 75) or LPN (n = 75) were compared. There was no significant difference between the 2 cohorts with respect to patient age (P = .17), BMI (P = .68), ASA score (P = .96), preoperative estimated glomerulofiltration rate (eGFR; P = .54), or tumor size (P = .17). Mean operative time for RPN was 200 vs 197 minutes for LPN (P = .75). Mean estimated blood loss (EBL) was higher in the RPN cohort (323 vs 222 mL, P = .01). There was no significant difference with respect to warm ischemia time (18.2 minutes vs 20.3 minutes, P = .27), length of hospitalization (P = .84), percent change in eGFR (P = .80), or adverse events (P = .52). All surgical margins were negative.
Conclusions:
Although initial surgical experience with RPN was included in this study and compared with a vast experience in LPN by the same surgeon, RPN offers at least comparable outcomes to LPN.
