Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Robotic-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy: Techniques to Improve Clinical Outcomes

  • Kidney Disease (G Ciancio, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Urology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

To summarize current options available for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy

Recent Findings

Partial nephrectomy (PN) is a standard treatment option for management of cT1 renal masses. It may be carried out by multiple approaches. Robot-assisted (RA) PN is one such option. The goal of treatment is both correct oncological (negative surgical margins) and functional (preservation of sufficient amount of renal parenchyma of the operated kidney) outcome. Appropriate outcomes depend on multiple factors. There are many, but among others tumor characteristics (size, location, i.e., tumor complexity), patient baseline renal function, patient comorbidities, and performance status etc. Based on all these, the surgeon adapts the intervention for each mass/patient by preoperative planning, absence/use/duration of warm or cold ischemia, perioperative imaging, resection technique adapted to tumor location and depth of invasion, use of hemostatics, type and degree of renal parenchymal closure and others details. Nephroprotective agents have not shown efficacy so far. It should not be forgotten that surgeon’s experience plays a key role in the achievement of good results.

Summary

Although multiple factors have a role in the RA partial nephrectomy, surgeon experience and adaptation of technique of intervention have the crucial role in the achievement of both functional and oncological results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ljungberg B, Albiges L, Bensalah K, Bex A, Giles RH, Hora M, Kuczyk MA, Lam T, Marconi L, Merseburger AS, Powles T, Staehler M. Renal Cell Carcinoma. EAU Guidelines. 2020. https://uroweb.org/guideline/renal-cell-carcinoma/.

  2. Bertolo R, Autorino R, Simone G, Derweesh I, Garisto JD, Minervini A, et al. Outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for clinical T2 renal tumors: a multicenter analysis (ROSULA Collaborative Group). Eur Urol. 2018;74:226–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Veccia A, Dell’oglio P, Antonelli A, Minervini A, Simone G, Challacombe B, et al. Robotic partial nephrectomy versus radical nephrectomy in elderly patients with large renal masses. Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2020;72:99–108.

  4. Gettman MT, Blute ML, Chow GK, Neururer R, Bartsch G, Peschel R. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: Technique and initial clinical experience with daVinci robotic system. Urology. 2004;64:914–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Carneiro A, Sivaraman A, Sanchez-Salas R, Di Trapani E, Barret E, Rozet F, et al. Evolution from laparoscopic to robotic nephron sparing surgery: a high-volume laparoscopic center experience on achieving “trifecta” outcomes. World J Urol. 2015;33:2039–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Garisto J, Bertolo R, Dagenais J, Sagalovich D, Fareed K, Fergany A, et al. Robotic versus open partial nephrectomy for highly complex renal masses: Comparison of perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes. Urol Oncol. 2018;36:471.e1-471.e9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Mir MC, Pavan N, Parekh DJ. Current Paradigm for Ischemia in Kidney Surgery. J Urol. 2016;195:1655–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Antonelli A, Mari A, Longo N, Novara G, Porpiglia F, Schiavina R, et al. Role of clinical and surgical factors for the prediction of immediate, early and late functional results, and its relationship with cardiovascular outcome after partial nephrectomy: Results from the prospective multicenter RECORd 1 project. J Urol. 2018;199:927–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mir MC, Ercole C, Takagi T, Zhang Z, Velet L, Remer EM, et al. Decline in renal function after partial nephrectomy: Etiology and prevention. J Urol. 2015;193:1889–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kutikov A, Uzzo RG. The R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score: a comprehensive standardized system for quantitating renal tumor size, location and depth. J Urol. 2009;182:844–53.

  11. Cacciamani GE, Gill T, Medina L, Ashrafi A, Winter M, Sotelo R, et al. Impact of host factors on robotic partial nephrectomy outcomes: Comprehensive systematic eeview and meta-analysis. J Urol. 2018;200:716–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Klatte T, Ficarra V, Gratzke C, Kaouk J, Kutikov A, Macchi V, et al. A literature review of renal surgical anatomy and surgical strategies for partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol. 2015;980–92.

  13. Borojeni S, Borojeni A, Panayotopoulos P, Bouvier A, Aubé C, Azzouzi AR, et al. Study of renal and kidney tumor vascularization using data from preoperative three-dimensional arteriography prior to partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol Focus. 2020;6:112–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Desai MM, De Castro Abreu AL, Leslie S, Cai J, Huang EYH, Lewandowski PM, et al. Robotic partial nephrectomy with superselective versus main artery clamping: a retrospective comparison. Eur Urol. 2014;66:713–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Garisto JD, Dagenais J, Nyame Y, Sagalovich D, Bertolo R, Kaouk JH. Precise clamping of renal artery with endovascular stents during robotic partial nephrectomy: Technical hints to optimize outcomes. Urology. 2018;118:239–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Veccia A, Antonelli A, Uzzo RG, Novara G, Kutikov A, Ficarra V, et al. Predictive value of nephrometry scores in nephron-sparing surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus. 2020;6:490–504.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Waldert M, Klatte T. Nephrometry scoring systems for surgical decision-making in nephron-sparing surgery. Curr Opin Urol. 2014:437–40.

  18. Davidiuk AJ, Parker AS, Thomas CS, Leibovich BC, Castle EP, Heckman MG, et al. Mayo adhesive probability score: An accurate image-based scoring system to predict adherent perinephric fat in partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol. 2014;66:1165–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Khene ZE, Peyronnet B, Mathieu R, Fardoun T, Verhoest G, Bensalah K. Analysis of the impact of adherent perirenal fat on peri-operative outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy. World J Urol. 2015;33:1801–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hyde ER, Berger LU, Ramachandran N, Hughes-Hallett A, Pavithran NP, Tran MGB, et al. Interactive virtual 3D models of renal cancer patient anatomies alter partial nephrectomy surgical planning decisions and increase surgeon confidence compared to volume-rendered images. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2019;14:723–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Porpiglia F, Amparore D, Checcucci E, Manfredi M, Stura I, Migliaretti G, et al. Three-dimensional virtual imaging of renal tumours: a new tool to improve the accuracy of nephrometry scores. BJU Int. 2019;124:945–54. (impt) depicts the preoperative planning importance.

  22. Porpiglia F, Bertolo R, Checcucci E, Amparore D, Autorino R, Dasgupta P, et al. Development and validation of 3D printed virtual models for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and partial nephrectomy: Urologists’ and patients’ perception. World J Urol. 2018;36:201–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Porpiglia F, Checcucci E, Amparore D, Piramide F, Volpi G, Granato S, et al. Three-dimensional augmented reality robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in case of complex tumours (PADUA ≥10): a new intraoperative tool overcoming the ultrasound guidance. Eur Urol. 2020;78:229–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Thompson RH, Lane BR, Lohse CM, Leibovich BC, Fergany A, Frank I, et al. Every minute counts when the renal hilum is clamped during partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol. 2010;58:340–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Porter J, Blau E. Robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy: evolving techniques and expanding considerations. Curr Opin Urol. 2020;30:79–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Bravi CA, Mari A, Larcher A, Amparore D, Antonelli A, Artibani W, et al. Toward individualized approaches to partial nephrectomy: Assessing the correlation between ischemia time and patient health status (RECORD2 Project). European Urology Oncology. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2020.05.009.

  27. Rosen DC, Kannappan M, Kim Y, Paulucci DJ, Beksac AT, Abaza R, et al. The impact of obesity in patients undergoing robotic partial nephrectomy. J Endourol. 2019;33:431–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ebbing J, Menzel F, Frumento P, Miller K, Ralla B, Fuller TF, et al. Outcome of kidney function after ischaemic and zero-ischaemic laparoscopic and open nephron-sparing surgery for renal cell cancer. BMC Nephrol. 2019;20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12882-019-1215-3.

  29. Cacciamani GE, Medina LG, Gill TS, Mendelsohn A, Husain F, Bhardwaj L, et al. Impact of renal hilar control on outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy: Systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus. 2019;619–35.

  30. Rosen DC, Paulucci DJ, Abaza R, Eun DD, Bhandari A, Hemal AK, et al. Is off clamp always beneficial during robotic partial nephrectomy? a propensity score-matched comparison of clamp technique in patients with two kidneys. J Endourol. 2017;31:1176–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Mutelica L, Mouracadé P, Kara O, Dagenais J, Maurice MJ, Kaouk JH. No ischemia technique, parenchymal preservation and age are the most important determinants of renal function after partial nephrectomy. Prog Urol. 2020;30:3–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Greco F, Autorino R, Altieri V, Campbell S, Ficarra V, Gill I, et al. Ischemia techniques in nephron-sparing surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes. Eur Urol. 2019;75:477–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Antonelli A, Cindolo L, Sandri M, Bertolo R, Annino F, Carini M, et al. Safety of on- vs off-clamp robotic partial nephrectomy: per-protocol analysis from the data of the CLOCK randomized trial. World J Urol. 2020;38:1101–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Komninos C, Shin TY, Tuliao P, Han WK, Chung BH, Choi YD, et al. Renal function is the same 6 months after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy regardless of clamp technique: Analysis of outcomes for off-clamp, selective arterial clamp and main artery clamp techniques, with a minimum follow-up of 1 year. BJU Int. 2015;115:921–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Kallingal GJS, Weinberg JM, Reis IM, Nehra A, Venkatachalam MA, Parekh DJ. Long-term response to renal ischaemia in the human kidney after partial nephrectomy: Results from a prospective clinical trial. BJU Int. 2016;117:766–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Nguyen MM, Gill IS. Halving ischemia time during laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. J Urol. 2008;179:627–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Stonier T, Rai BP, Trimboli M, Abroaf A, Patel A, Gowrie-Mohan S, et al. Early vs. standard unclamping technique in minimal access partial nephrectomy: a meta-analysis of observational cohort studies and the Lister cohort. J Robot Surg. 2017:389–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-017-0734-9.

  38. Bertolo R, Campi R, Klatte T, Kriegmair MC, Mir MC, Ouzaid I, et al. Suture techniques during laparoscopic and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and quantitative synthesis of peri-operative outcomes. BJU Int. 2019;923–46.

  39. Badani KK, Kothari PD, Okhawere KE, Eun D, Hemal A, Abaza R, et al. Selective clamping during robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in patients with a solitary kidney: is it safe and does it help? BJU Int. 2020;125:893–7. (impt) PN outcomes in patients with solitary kidney

  40. Beksac AT, Okhawere KE, Rosen DC, Elbakry A, Dayal BD, Daza J, et al. Do patients with Stage 3–5 chronic kidney disease benefit from ischaemia-sparing techniques during partial nephrectomy? BJU Int. 2020;125:442–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. O’Neill DC, Murphy B, Carmody E, Trench L, Dunne R, Lee MJ, et al. Assessment of renal vascular anatomy on multi-detector computed tomography in living renal donors. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2020;64:484–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Lieberman L, Barod R, Dalela D, Diaz-Insua M, Abaza R, Adshead J, et al. Use of main renal artery clamping predominates over minimal clamping techniques during robotic partial nephrectomy for complex tumors. J Endourol. 2017;31:149–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Raman A, Kuusk T, Hyde ER, Berger LU, Bex A, Mumtaz F. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in a horseshoe kidney. A case report and review of the literature. Urology. 2018;114:e3–5.

  44. Arora S, Rogers C. Partial Nephrectomy in Central Renal Tumors. J Endourol. 2018;32:S63–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Abreu ALC, Gill IS, Desai MM. Zero-ischaemia robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) for hilar tumours. BJU Int. 2011;108:948–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Blum KA, Paulucci DJ, Abaza R, Eun DD, Bhandari A, Delto JC, et al. Main renal artery clamping with or without renal vein clamping during robotic partial nephrectomy for clinical T1 renal masses: Perioperative and long-term functional outcomes. Urology. 2016;97:118–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Cao J, Zhu S, Ye M, Liu K, Liu Z, Han W, et al. Comparison of renal artery vs renal artery-vein clamping during partial nephrectomy: a system review and meta-analysis. J Endourol. 2020;523–30.

  48. Viprakasit DP, Derweesh I, Wong C, Su LM, Stroup SP, Bazzi W, et al. Selective renal parenchymal clamping in robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: A multi-institutional experience. J Endourol. 2011;25:1487–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Steinberg PL, Munver R, Ghavamian R. Impact of repeated hilar clamping on renal function during laparoscopic and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. J Endourol. 2011;25:1525–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Tan M, Xu Y, Xu D, Jiang J, Zhao W, Cui D, et al. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy with sequential precise tumor-specific segmental renal artery clamping for multiple ipsilateral renal tumors: a new treatment approach and initial experience. Urology. 2017/07/26. 2017;108:102–7.

  51. Hankins RA, Walton-Diaz A, Truong H, Shih J, Bratslavsky G, Pinto PA, et al. Renal functional outcomes after robotic multiplex partial nephrectomy: the National Cancer Institute experience with robotic partial nephrectomy for 3 or more tumors in a single kidney. Int Urol Nephrol. 2016;48:1817–21.

  52. Ramirez D, Caputo PA, Krishnan J, Zargar H, Kaouk JH. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy with intracorporeal renal hypothermia using ice slush: Step-by-step technique and matched comparison with warm ischaemia. BJU Int. 2016;117:531–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Saitz TR, Dorsey PJ, Colli J, Lee BR. Induction of cold ischemia in patients with solitary kidney using retrograde intrarenal cooling: 2-year functional outcomes. Int Urol Nephrol. 2013;45:313–20.

  54. Thompson RH, Frank I, Lohse CM, Saad IR, Fergany A, Zincke H, et al. The impact of ischemia time during open nephron sparing surgery on solitary kidneys: a multi-institutional study. J Urol. 2007;177:471–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Lane BR, Russo P, Uzzo RG, Hernandez AV, Boorjian SA, Thompson RH, et al. Comparison of cold and warm ischemia during partial nephrectomy in 660 solitary kidneys reveals predominant role of nonmodifiable factors in determining ultimate renal function. J Urol. 2011;185:421–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Dagenais J, Bertolo R, Garisto J, Chavali J, Kaouk J. “At-risk” kidney: How surgical factors influence renal functional preservation after partial nephrectomy. Int J Urol. 2019;26:565–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Zhang S, Lin T, Liu G, Zhang S, Guo H. Comparisons of the safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for large angiomyolipomas: a propensity score-matched analysis. Int Urol Nephrol. 2020;52.

  58. D’Urso L, Simone G, Rosso R, Collura D, Castelli E, Giacobbe A, et al. Benefits and shortcomings of superselective transarterial embolization of renal tumors before zero ischemia laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2014;40:1731–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Bouvier A, Besnier L, Paisant A, Briot T, Hebert T, Daniel V, et al. Blue dye embolization of renal tumor: a new technique to improve tumor localization during laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech. 2020;30:299–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Kaczmarek BF, Sukumar S, Kumar RK, Desa N, Jost K, Diaz M, et al. Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic ultrasound probes for robotic partial nephrectomy. J Endourol. 2013;27:1137–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Rao AR, Gray R, Mayer E, Motiwala H, Laniado M, Karim O. Occlusion angiography using intraoperative contrast-enhanced ultrasound scan (CEUS): A novel technique demonstrating segmental renal blood supply to assist zero-ischaemia robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol. 2013;63:913–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Buffi NM, Saita A, Lughezzani G, Porter J, Dell’Oglio P, Amparore D, et al. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for complex (PADUA Score ≥10) tumors: techniques and results from a multicenter experience at four high-volume centers. Eur Urol. 2020;77:95–100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Khene ZE, Peyronnet B, Gasmi A, Verhoest G, Mathieu R, Bensalah K. Endophytic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Robot-Assisted Surgery: Functional Outcomes - A Comprehensive Review of the Current Literature. Urol Int. 2020;343–50.

  64. Minervini A, Carini M, Uzzo RG, Campi R, Smaldone MC, Kutikov A. Standardized reporting of resection technique during nephron-sparing surgery: The surface-intermediate-base margin score. Eur Urol. 2014;803–5.

  65. Marconi L, Desai MM, Ficarra V, Porpiglia F, Van Poppel H. Renal preservation and partial nephrectomy: Patient and surgical factors. Eur Urol Focus. 2016;589–600.

  66. Minervini A, Ficarra V, Rocco F, Antonelli A, Bertini R, Carmignani G, et al. Simple enucleation is equivalent to traditional partial nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: Results of a nonrandomized, retrospective, comparative study. J Urol. 2011;185:1604–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Longo N, Minervini A, Antonelli A, Bianchi G, Bocciardi AM, Cunico SC, et al. Simple enucleation versus standard partial nephrectomy for clinical T1 renal masses: Perioperative outcomes based on a matched-pair comparison of 396 patients (RECORd project). Eur J Surg Oncol. 2014;40:762–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Dagenais J, Bertolo R, Garisto J, Maurice MJ, Mouracade P, Kara O, et al. Variability in partial nephrectomy outcomes: Does your surgeon matter? Eur Urol. 2019;75:628–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Bahler CD, Clint Cary K, Garg S, DeRoo EM, Tabib CH, Kansal JK, et al. Differentiating reconstructive techniques in partial nephrectomy: a propensity score analysis. Canadian Journal of Urology. 2015;22:7788–96.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Minervini A, Tuccio A, Masieri L, Veneziano D, Vittori G, Siena G, et al. Endoscopic robot-assisted simple enucleation (ERASE) for clinical T1 renal masses: description of the technique and early postoperative results. Surg Endosc. 2015;29:1241–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Msezane LP, Katz MH, Gofrit ON, Shalhav AL, Zorn KC. Hemostatic agents and instruments in laparoscopic renal surgery. J Endourol. 2008;403–8.

  72. Peyronnet B, Oger E, Khene Z, Verhoest G, Mathieu R, Roumiguié M, et al. The use of hemostatic agents does not prevent hemorrhagic complications of robotic partial nephrectomy. World J Urol. 2015;33:1815–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Wong NC, Alvim RG, Sjoberg DD, Shingarev R, Power NE, Spaliviero M, et al. Phase III trial of intravenous mannitol versus placebo during nephron-sparing surgery: Post hoc analysis of 3-yr outcomes. Eur Urol Focus. 2019.

  74. Arora S, Heulitt G, Menon M, Jeong W, Ahlawat RK, Capitanio U, et al. Retroperitoneal vs transperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: Comparison in a multi-institutional setting. Urology. 2018;120:131–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Laviana AA, Tan HJ, Hu JC, Weizer AZ, Chang SS, Barocas DA. Retroperitoneal versus transperitoneal robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a matched-pair, bicenter analysis with cost comparison using time-driven activity-based costing. Curr Opin Urol. 2018;108–14.

  76. Peyronnet B, Tondut L, Bernhard JC, Vaessen C, Doumerc N, Sebe P, et al. Impact of hospital volume and surgeon volume on robot-assisted partial nephrectomy outcomes: a multicentre study. BJU Int. 2018;121:916–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Omidele OO, Davoudzadeh N, Palese M. Trifecta outcomes to assess learning curve of robotic partial nephrectomy. Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. 2018;22.

  78. Bajalia EM, Parikh KA, Haehn DA, Kahn AE, Ball CT, Thiel DD. Assessment of advanced perioperative outcomes to identify the true learning curve of robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy. Urology. 2020;144:136–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2020.06.031.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Larcher A, Muttin F, Peyronnet B, De Naeyer G, Khene Z-E, Dell’Oglio P, et al. The learning curve for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: impact of surgical experience on perioperative outcomes. Eur Urol. 2019;253–6. (impt) surgeon experience i sone the main factors for a success of PN.

  80. Paulucci DJ, Abaza R, Eun DD, Hemal AK, Badani KK. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: continued refinement of outcomes beyond the initial learning curve. BJU Int. 2017;119:748–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Institute Montsouris, 42 Boulevard Jourdan, 75014, Paris, France

    P. Macek, X. Cathelineau, Y. P. Barbe & R. Sanchez-Salas

  2. Rochester General Hospital, Rochester, NY, USA

    A. R. Rodriguez

Authors
  1. P. Macek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. X. Cathelineau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Y. P. Barbe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. R. Sanchez-Salas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. A. R. Rodriguez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Macek.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Authors declare that no conflict of interest regarding this article.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

All reported studies/experiments with human or animal subjects performed by the authors were performed in accordance with all applicable ethical standards including the Helsinki declaration and its amendments, institutional/national research committee standards, and international/national/institutional guidelines.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Kidney Diseases

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Macek, P., Cathelineau, X., Barbe, Y. et al. Robotic-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy: Techniques to Improve Clinical Outcomes. Curr Urol Rep 22, 51 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-021-01068-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-021-01068-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation