Page 67 - Read Online

Page 10 of 11 Sawada et al. Mini-invasive Surg 2021;5:6 I http://dx.doi.org/10.20517/2574-1225.2020.100

Financial support and sponsorship
None.

Conflicts of interest
All authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval and consent to participate
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Kyoto University Graduate School and Faculty of
Medicine (reference number: R1581).

Consent for publication
Not applicable.

Copyright
© The Author(s) 2021.

REFERENCES
1. MacLennan S, Imamura M, Lapitan MC, et al; UCAN Systematic Review Reference Group. EAU Renal Cancer Guideline Panel.
Systematic review of oncological outcomes following surgical management of localised renal cancer. Eur Urol 2012;61:972-93.
2. Van Poppel H, Da Pozzo L, Albrecht W, et al. A prospective, randomised EORTC intergroup phase 3 study comparing the oncologic
outcome of elective nephron-sparing surgery and radical nephrectomy for low-stage renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 2011;59:543-52.
3. Kaouk JH, Spana G, Hillyer SP, White MA, Haber GP, Goldfarb D. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for a 7-cm mass in
a renal allograft. Am J Transplant 2011;11:2242-6.
4. Benway BM, Bhayani SB, Rogers CG, et al. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: an international experience. Eur Urol 2010;57:815-20.
5. Maurice MJ, Ramirez D, Kaouk JH. Advances in robotic-assisted treatments for renal cell carcinoma. Curr Opin Urol 2016;26:417-23.
6. Garisto J, Bertolo R, Dagenais J, et al. Robotic versus open partial nephrectomy for highly complex renal masses: Comparison of
perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes. Urol Oncol 2018;36:471.e1-9.
7. Larcher A, Capitanio U, De Naeyer G, et al. Is Robot-assisted Surgery Contraindicated in the Case of Partial Nephrectomy for Complex
Tumours or Relevant Comorbidities? A Comparative Analysis of Morbidity, Renal Function, and Oncologic Outcomes. Eur Urol Oncol
2018;1:61-8.
8. Ficarra V, Minervini A, Antonelli A, et al. A multicentre matched-pair analysis comparing robot-assisted versus open partial nephrectomy.
BJU Int 2014;113:936-41.
9. Mano R, Schulman A, Hakimi AA, et al. Cost comparison of open and robotic partial nephrectomy using a short postoperative pathway.
Urology 2015;85:596-603.
10. Han KS, Song GH, You D, et al. Comparison of Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic vs Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic vs Open Partial
Nephrectomy in Patients with T1 Renal Masses. J Endourol 2017;31:374-9.
11. Simhan J, Smaldone MC, Tsai KJ, et al. Perioperative outcomes of robotic and open partial nephrectomy for moderately and highly
complex renal lesions. J Urol 2012;187:2000-4.
12. Lee S, Oh J, Hong SK, Lee SE, Byun SS. Open versus robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: effect on clinical outcome. J Endourol
2011;25:1181-5.
13. Ljungberg B, Albiges L, Abu-Ghanem Y, et al. European Association of Urology Guidelines on Renal Cell Carcinoma: The 2019 Update.
Eur Urol 2019;75:799-810.
14. Kaouk JH, Khalifeh A, Hillyer S, Haber GP, Stein RJ, Autorino R. Robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: step-by-step
contemporary technique and surgical outcomes at a single high-volume institution. Eur Urol 2012;62:553-61.
15. Gill IS, Eisenberg MS, Aron M, Berger A, Ukimura O, et al. ‘Zero Ischemia’ partial nephrectomy: novel laparoscopic and robotic
technique. Eur Urol 2011;59:128-34.
16. Russo P. Partial nephrectomy for renal cancer (part II): the impact of renal ischaemia, patient preparation, surgical approaches,
management of complications and utilization. BJU Int 2010;105:1494-507.
17. Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg
2009;250:187-96.
18. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, Mackenzie C. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies:
Development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987;40:373-83.
19. 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.
20. Assel M, Sjoberg D, Elders A, et al. Guidelines for reporting of statistics for clinical research in urology. BJU Int 2019;123:401-10.
21. D’Agostino Sr RB. Adjustment methods: propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-
randomized control group. In Tutorials in Biostatistics, Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons; 2005. p.67-83.