Surgical Approach for Partial Nephrectomy in the Management of Small Renal Masses: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background: A variety of surgical and nonsurgical management options for small renal masses (SRMs) now exist. Surgery in the form of partial nephrectomy (PN) has three different approaches. It is unclear which PN approach, if any, offers superior clinical outcomes. Aim: The aim of this study is to compare outcomes in patients with SRMs <4 cm undergoing PN through the open partial nephrectomy (OPN), laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN), or robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) approach and to establish the advantages and disadvantages of the various approaches. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted for studies comparing at least two of the above techniques. Eighteen studies and 17,013 patients were included in our study. A network meta-analysis with a frequentist framework was performed. OPN was used as the baseline comparator. The prespecified primary outcome was R0 resection rates. Secondary outcomes included operating time, ischemia time, blood loss, transfusion rates, urine leak rates, significant morbidity, length of stay, and recurrence. Results: There was no significant difference between the techniques in terms of R0 rates, tumor recurrence, urine leak rates, renal function, and >3a Clavien-Dindo complications. LPN had a longer ischemic time and operating time. OPN had a longer length of stay and higher average intraoperative blood loss. RPN had lower blood transfusion rates. Discussion: All approaches are acceptable from an oncological perspective. The minimally invasive approaches (i.e., RPN and LPN) offer advantages in terms of morbidity; however, LPN may increase ischemic time and operative duration. Variations between perioperative outcomes may influence the choice of approach on a case-by-case and institutional basis.