Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 10, 2026
Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy
Published on: May 19, 2022
Has Sliding-Clip Renorrhaphy Eliminated the Need for Collecting System Repair During Robot-Assisted Partial
Robert D Williams1, Caroline Snowden1, Ryan Frank2
11 Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic , Jacksonville, Florida.
Objective:
We evaluated whether single-layer renorrhaphy (SLR) without collecting system (CS) closure is sufficient following robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN).
Patients And Methods:
One hundred fifty consecutive patients underwent RAPN by a single surgeon and were prospectively labeled with regard to CS entry during surgery. Patients with CS entry were subdivided into two groups: those with classical renorrhaphy (CR) (i.e., two-layer repair) and those with SLR (i.e., without CS repair). Perioperative variables and outcomes were compared between CR and SLR groups.
Results:
Ninety patients had CS entry during RAPN. Of these 90 patients, 64 had CR, and 26 had SLR, with mean ages of 62 and 59 years (p = 0.22), tumor sizes of 3.4 and 3.3 cm (p = 0.61), Mayo Adhesive Probability scores of 1.8 and 1.8 (p = 0.95), and radius, exophytic/endophytic, nearness to CS, and laterality scores of 8.5 and 8.0 (p = 0.16), respectively. Mean warm ischemia times (WITs) were 19.6 and 17.3 minutes (p = 0.04), hospital stays of 3.0 and 2.8 days (p = 0.62), and drain times of 2.9 and 2.7 days (p = 0.65), for the CR and SLR groups, respectively. Using the Clavien-Dindo classification, there were a total of six grade III or higher complications, with no difference between the CR and SLR subgroups (p = 1.0). Renal function using creatinine or glomerular filtration rate as surrogates showed no difference between groups preoperatively or up until 2 years postoperatively.
Conclusions:
Omitting CS repair during RAPN with SLR decreases WIT without altering complications, hospital stay, or drain time. Long-term renal function was not associated with CS repair.
