The Safety and Feasibility of Ambulatory Minimally-Invasive Partial Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
PURPOSE: Emerging evidence supports the use of minimally invasive partial nephrectomy (MIPN) in ambulatory settings. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate differences in perioperative characteristics, complication/readmission rates and satisfaction/cost data between ambulatory and standard-length discharge (SLD) MIPN. METHODS: This study was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023429854). A systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases was conducted, including studies comparing ambulatory MIPN versus SLD MIPN for patients with renal masses. Studies were assessed for quality using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies score. Meta-analysis was performed for comparative studies, and non-comparative studies were included narratively. RESULTS: Eleven studies were included with a pooled population of 20,575 patients, of which 1,419 (7%) had a length of stay less than 1 day and were considered the ambulatory group. There were no significant differences in the total complication rates (RR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.24, 1.04; p = 0.06) or 30-day readmission rates (RR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.56, 1.35; p=0.53) between the ambulatory and SLD groups. There were fewer > 3 Clavien-Dindo complications in the ambulatory group (RR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.19, 0.59; p = 0.0002). Few studies reported average healthcare cost and patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: In appropriately selected patients, ambulatory MIPN is safe and feasible. Future studies are needed to quantify cost and patient satisfaction differences and further identify appropriate patient selection criteria for ambulatory MIPN. SOURCES OF FUNDING: No funding.
