Comparative outcomes and costs of robotic assisted, laparoscopic, and open partial nephrectomy: a contemporary analysis of national inpatient sample data
Manisha Lin, Elizabeth Sottung, Vietbao H. Phan, Mumbi E. Kimani, Costas D. Lallas, Raegan M. Davis, Scott W. Keith, Patrick J. Moeller, Vittorio Maio

TL;DR
This study compares robotic, laparoscopic, and open partial nephrectomy techniques in the U.S., finding that minimally invasive methods have better outcomes and lower costs than open surgery.
Contribution
The study provides contemporary national data on the utilization, outcomes, and costs of three partial nephrectomy approaches in U.S. renal cancer patients.
Findings
Robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) was the most common approach (63.4%) and had the lowest odds of complications and mortality compared to open surgery.
Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LAPN) had the lowest median hospital costs ($14,627) and lower complication rates than open surgery.
RAPN and LAPN showed clinical advantages over open partial nephrectomy (OPN), including shorter hospital stays and fewer transfusions.
Abstract
Partial nephrectomy is increasingly favored for small renal masses due to its renal function-preserving benefits. This study compared contemporary utilization patterns, perioperative outcomes, and hospital costs of robotic-assisted (RAPN), laparoscopic (LAPN), and open partial nephrectomy (OPN) among U.S. patients with renal cancer. Using the 2016–2019 National Inpatient Sample, renal cancer patients undergoing RAPN, LAPN, or OPN based on ICD-10-CM/PCS codes were identified. Patient demographics, comorbidities, hospital characteristics, length of stay (LOS), perioperative complications, and hospital costs, were summarized by surgical approach. Regression analyses adjusted for patient- and hospital-level covariates were used to compare perioperative outcomes, LOS, and costs across procedures. An estimated 89,290 partial nephrectomies were identified (mean age 59.4 years; 60.4% male;…
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsRenal cell carcinoma treatment · Minimally Invasive Surgical Techniques · Pediatric Urology and Nephrology Studies
