Quality Assessment of Intraoperative Adverse Event Reporting During 29 227 Robotic Partial Nephrectomies: A Systematic Review and Cumulative Analysis.

Abstract The definition of intraoperative adverse events (IAEs) still lacks standardization, hampering the assessment of surgical performance in this regard. Over the years, efforts to address this issue have been carried out to improve the reporting of outcomes. In 2019, the European Association of Urology (EAU) proposed a standardized reporting tool for IAEs in urology. The objective of the present study is to distill systematically published data on IAEs in patients undergoing robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) for renal masses to answer three key questions (KQs). (KQ1) Which system is used to report the IAEs? (KQ2) What is the frequency of IAEs? (KQ3) What types of IAEs are reported? A comprehensive systematic review of all English-language publications on RPN was carried out. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to evaluate PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases (from January 1, 2000 to January 1, 2019). Quality of reporting and grading complications were assessed according to the EAU recommendations. Globally, 59 (35.3%) and 108 (64.7%) studies reported zero and one or more IAEs, respectively. Overall, 761 (2.6%) patients reported at least one IAE. Intraoperative bleeding is reported as the most common IAE (58%). Our analysis showed no improvement in reporting and grading of IAEs over time. Patient summary Up to now, an agreement regarding the definition and reporting of intraoperative adverse events (IAEs) in the literature has not been achieved. The aim of this study is to evaluate the reporting of IAEs in patients undergoing robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) after a systematic review of the literature. More rigorous reporting of IAEs during RPN is needed to measure their impact on patients' perioperative care.