Purpose: To assess the impact of HA on robotic PN (RPN) outcomes.
Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from patients who underwent RPN in eight centers between 2009 and 2013. Hemorrhagic complications were defined as the occurrence of a pseudoaneurysm, arteriovenous fistula or hematoma requiring transfusion. Patients were first divided into two groups: group A (use of at least one HA) and group B (no HA used), and then into five groups to assess the impact of each HA: group 1 (no HA), group 2 (Floseal(®) only), group 3 (Surgicel(®) only), group 4 (Tachosil(®) only) and group 5 (Surgicel(®) + Floseal(®)). The impact of HA was evaluated by univariate and multivariate analysis.
Results: Out of 515 RPN, 315 (61 %) were done using at least one HA (group A) and 200 (39 %) were done without any HA (group B). Patients in both groups had similar hemorrhagic complication rates (13 % vs. 15 %, p = 0.42) and postoperative complication rates (19 % vs. 23 %, p = 0.32). In multivariate analysis, the absence of HA was not a risk factor for hemorrhagic complications (OR 0.77, p = 0.54). When each type of HA was considered individually, none was associated with the occurrence of hemorrhagic complication either in univariate or in multivariate analysis.
Conclusion: In this multicenter study, the use of HA was not associated with a lower risk of hemorrhagic or global complications.
Keywords: Complications; Fibrin sealant; Hemostatic agent; Outcomes; Partial nephrectomy; Robotic.