Poster Abstracts

Le résumé fourni par la source

blood loss, rate of blood transfusions, Clavien-Dindo complications, conversion to radical nephrectomy (RN) and positive surgical margins.Propensity score matching was performed to a 1:3 to match baseline variables between groups.Bivariate analysis was used to compare outcomes of interest between groups.Results: 348 patients (87 imperative vs 261 nonimperative indications) were included in the analysis.No significant differences were found between groups for ischaemic time (18.9minvs 18.6min, p=0.76), operative time (186min vs 180min, p=0.67), estimated blood loss (226ml vs 211ml, p=0.55),rate of blood transfusions (2.5% vs 3.4%, p=0.99), or Clavien-Dindo complications (p=0.88).There were no conversions to RN in the imperative group and 6.3% (n=8) conversions in the non-imperative group (p=0.37).Positive surgical margins were seen in 1.2% (1/87) of the imperative group and 4.1% of the non-imperative group (1/261), p=0.37.Conclusion: RAPN is feasible and safe for imperative indications and demonstrates similar outcomes to elective indications.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.