Videosurgery
Robotic left nephrectomy with level IV inferior vena cava thrombectomy using the AngioVac system
Jacopo Durante1, Michele Santarsieri1, Francesca Manassero1, Girolamo Fiorini1, Claudia Cariello2, Piero Lippolis3, Andrea Colli4, Giorgio Pomara1
1Department of Urology (Urologia II SSN), Cisanello Hospital, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
2Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care Medicine, Cardiothoracic Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, University Hospital of Pisa, Pisa,Italy
3General and Peritoneal Surgery Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy
4Section of Cardiac Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
Citation: Durante J, Santarsieri M, Manassero F, et al. Robotic left nephrectomy with level IV inferior vena cava thrombectomy using the AngioVac system. www.ceju.online/journal/2023/robotic-tumour-thrombus-cavotomy-nephrectomy-and-IVC-thrombectomy-2313.php
Key Words: robotic • tumour thrombus • cavotomy • nephrectomy and IVC thrombectomy • AngioVac system

We report the first successful elective procedure of atrial thrombus aspiration with the AngioVac System (AVS) and robotic-assisted level IV inferior vena cava (IVC) tumour thrombectomy in a left renal carcinoma.
A 75-year-old male presented with 7.2 cm left renal tumour and a level IV IVC tumour thrombus (13.4 cm length) extending into the right atrium for 3.8 cm without distant metastasis.
We decided to combine AVS of aspiration (for the intra-atrial thrombus component treatment) with robotic surgery (for the left nephrectomy and IVC thrombectomy). VV-ECMO (right jugular - right femoral vein) was performed with mild heparinization (ACT target 190), and the AngioVAC catheter was inserted from the right jugular vein to the right atrium, targeting the thrombus. Atrial thrombus aspiration was performed under transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) control. An intraoperative cavography and a total body CT scan, performed 2days after the AngioVac procedure, confirmed the absence of the thrombus in the atrium, showing a level IIIa IVC-thrombus.
After one week, the two-step robotic procedure started with the left radical nephrectomy and subsequently concluded with cavotomy and complete removal of the tumour thrombus (confirmed by ECD-sonography). The AngioVAC system aspiration operative time was 210 minutes. The Robotic Nephrectomy and IVC thrombus removal operative time was 560 minutes with 300cc of blood loss. The patient's hospital stay after the nephrectomy and cavotomy was 9 days. The definitive pathology showed a stage pT3b clear cell carcinoma, Fuhrman grade III, with 8 cm neoplastic thrombus. The length of the neoplastic thrombus aspirated with the AngioVAC system was not evaluable. The use of the AngioVac system transformed the IVC thrombus from level 4 to level 3, thereby avoiding the need for a sternotomy. This approach ensures a highly multidisciplinary and complex surgery in a procedure that is as minimally invasive as possible.
AngioVAC aspiration of intra-atrial thrombus combined with robotic surgery as an elective indication is a safe procedure for minimally invasive left nephrectomy with level IV inferior vena cava thrombectomy.

Article history
Submitted: 5 November, 2023
Accepted: 3 December, 2023
Published online: 6 January, 2024
doi: 10.5173/ceju.2023.254
Corresponding author
Jacopo Durante
email: jacopodurante@live.it
Conflicts of interest:  The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/).
Current issue
Ahead of print
Issue: 2024
Vol. 77, No. 3 Vol. 77, No. 2 Vol. 77, No. 1
Issue: 2023
Vol. 76, No. 4 Vol. 76, No. 3 Vol. 76, No. 2 Vol. 76, No. 1
Issue: 2022
Vol. 75, No. 4 Vol. 75, No. 3 Vol. 75, No. 2 Vol. 75, No. 1
Issue: 2021
Vol. 74, No. 4 Vol. 74, No. 3 Vol. 74, No. 2 Vol. 74, No. 1
Issue: 2020
Vol. 73, No. 4 Vol. 73, No. 3 Vol. 73, No. 2 Vol. 73, No. 1
Issue: 2019
Vol. 72, No. 4 Vol. 72, No. 3 Vol. 72, No. 2 Vol. 72, No. 1
Issue: 2018
Vol. 71, No. 4 Vol. 71, No. 3 Vol. 71, No. 2 Vol. 71, No. 1
Issue: 2017
Vol. 70, No. 4 Vol. 70, No. 3 Vol. 70, No. 2 Vol. 70, No. 1
Issue: 2016
Vol. 69, No. 4 Vol. 69, No. 3 Vol. 69, No. 2 Vol. 69, No. 1
Issue: 2015
Vol. 68, No. 4 Vol. 68, No. 3 Vol. 68, No. 2 Vol. 68, No. 1
Issue: 2014
Vol. 67, No. 4 Vol. 67, No. 3 Vol. 67, No. 2 Vol. 67, No. 1
Issue: 2013
Vol. 66, No. 4 Vol. 66, No. 3 Vol. 66, No. 2 Vol. 66, No. 1
Issue: 2012
Vol. 65, No. 4 Vol. 65, No. 3 Vol. 65, No. 2 Vol. 65, No. 1
Issue: 2011
Vol. 64, No. 4 Vol. 64, No. 3 Vol. 64, No. 2 Vol. 64, No. 1
Issue: 2010
Vol. 63, No. 4 Vol. 63, No. 3 Vol. 63, No. 2 Vol. 63, No. 1
Issue: 2009
Vol. 62, No. 4 Vol. 62, No. 3 Vol. 62, No. 2 Vol. 62, No. 1
Loading...
Logo CEJU