Sutureless versus renorrhaphy in robot-assisted off-clamp partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The necessity of routine parenchymal renorrhaphy during off-clamp robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) remains uncertain. This study aimed to compare perioperative, functional, safety, and oncological outcomes between sutureless and conventional renorrhaphy. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Comparative studies evaluating sutureless versus conventional renorrhaphy during purely off-clamp RAPN were included. Trifecta achievement was the primary outcome. Random-effects models were used for pooled analyses, with subgroup analysis according to study design. RESULTS: Four studies involving 787 patients, including one randomized controlled trial (RCT) and three propensity score-matched (PSM) studies, were included. The overall pooled estimate showed no statistically significant difference in Trifecta achievement (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.97-1.41), with substantial heterogeneity (I² = 86.5%). The PSM studies favored the sutureless approach (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.05-1.52), whereas the RCT yielded an RR of 0.97 (95% CI 0.92-1.04) and met the prespecified noninferiority criterion without demonstrating superiority. The sutureless approach was associated with a smaller perioperative eGFR decline (MD - 3.89, 95% CI - 6.16 to - 1.62), while no significant difference was observed in eGFR at 3 months. No statistically significant differences were identified in major complications, blood transfusion, or positive surgical margins; urinary and vascular complications were sparsely reported. CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients undergoing purely off-clamp RAPN, randomized evidence supports the noninferiority of a strategy that omits routine parenchymal renorrhaphy while permitting clinically necessary selective repair, but does not demonstrate superiority. Favorable estimates from PSM studies remain vulnerable to intraoperative treatment-selection bias. Current evidence is insufficient to determine whether omission of renorrhaphy affects urinary complications, long-term renal function, or oncological outcomes. REGISTRATION: This systematic review was registered prospectively in PROSPERO (CRD420261435995).