Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2022-06
Editorial Comment on: “Robotic vs Laparoscopic Nephroureterectomy for Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Multicenter Propensity-Score Matched Pair “tetrafecta” Analysis (ROBUUST Collaborative Group)” by Veccia et al.
RamanJ, MesserJ, SielatyckiJ, et al.Incidence and survival of patients with carcinoma of the ureter and renal pelvis in the USA, 1973–2005. BJU Int, 2010; 107:1059–1064.
2.
ClaymanR, KavoussiL, FigenshauR, et al.Laparoscopic nephroureterectomy: Initial case report. J Laparoendosc Surg, 1991; 1:343–349.
3.
WaltonTJ, NovaraG, Matsumoto et al. Oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic and open nephroureterectomy: Results from an international cohort. BJU Int, 2011; 108:406–412.
4.
NiS, TaoW, ChenQ, et al.Laparoscopic versus open nephroureterectomy for the treatment of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: A systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol, 2012; 61:1142–1153.
5.
PeyronnetB, SeisenT, Dominguez-EscrigJ, et al.Oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic nephroureterectomy versus open radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: A European Association of Urology Guidelines Systematic Review. Eur Urol, 2019; 5:205–223.
6.
PathakRA, PatelM, HemalAK. Comprehensive approach to port placement templates for robot-assisted laparoscopic urologic surgeries. J Endourol, 2017; 31:1269–1276.
7.
HemalAK, StanselI, BabbarP, et al.Robotic-assisted nephroureterectomy and bladder cuff excision without intraoperative repositioning. Urology, 2011; 78:357–364.
8.
PatelM, AboumohamedA, HemalAK. Does transition from the da Vinci Si to Xi robotic platform impact single-docking technique for robot-assisted laparoscopic nephroureterectomy. BJU Int, 2015; 116:990–994.
9.
PatelM, HemalAK. Does advancing technology improve outcomes? Comparison of Da Vinci Standard/S/Si to the Xi robotic platforms during robotic nephroureterectomy. J Endourol, 2018; 32:133–138.
10.
PathakRA, DuttaR, WilliamsJ, HemalAK. Robotic radical nephro-ureterectomy for high-risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma: Step-by-step illustrative video of surgical technique. Urol Video J, 2020; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolvj.2020.100068
11.
PathakRA, CrainNC, HemalAK. Radical robotic nephroureterectomy with bladder cuff excision: Overview of surgical technique. Urol Video J, 2022; 13:1–2.
12.
TinayI, Gelpi-HammerschmidtF, LeowJ, et al.Trends in utilization, perioperative outcomes, and costs of nephroureterectomies in the management of upper tract urothelial carcinoma: A 10-year population-based analysis. BJU Int, 2016; 117:954–960.
13.
RodriguezJ, PackiamV, BoysenW, et al.Utilization and outcomes of nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcionma by surgical approach. J Endourol, 2017; 31:661–665.
14.
PathakRA, HemalAK. Techniques and outcomes of robot-assisted nephro-ureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Eur Urol Focus, 2018; 4:657–661.
15.
AboumohamedA, KraneLS, HemalAK. Oncologic outcomes following robot-assisted laparoscopic nephroureterectomy with bladder cuff excision for upper tract urothelial carcinoma. J Urol, 2015; 194:1561–1566.
16.
VecciaA, CarbonaraU, DjaladatH, et al.Robotic vs laparoscopic nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: A multicenter propensity-score matched pair “tetrafecta” analysis (ROBUUST collaborative group). J Endourol, 2022; 36:752–759.
17.
PathakRA, HemalAK. Fate of residual ureteral stump in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical nephroureterectomy for high-risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma. TAU, 2020; 9:856–862.
18.
LenisA, DoninN, FaienaI, et al.Role of surgical approach on lymph node dissection yield and survival in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Urol Oncol, 2018; 36:e1–e9.
