Bovine serum albumin-glutaraldehyde (BioGlue ® ) tissue adhesive versus standard renorrhaphy following renal mass enucleation: a retrospective comparison.

Background: To present the operative and post-operative comparison between patients who underwent tumor-bed closure with sutures compared with bovine serum albumin-glutaraldehyde (BioGlue ^® ) tissue sealant only.
Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from our ongoing database of 507 eligible patients who underwent open NSS nephron-sparing surgery in our department between January 1995 and May 2014. Patients had tumor-bed closure with sealant adhesive (255 patients) or standard suture technique (252 patients). Demographic, clinical and perioperative data were compared between the two groups, by Chi-square test or by Fisher-Irwin exact test for categorical variables, and by t test for differences in means or by Wilcoxon rank sum test for continuous variables. A multivariate analysis was also done.
Results: Patients' baseline characteristics showed similar distribution of the analyzed parameters among both groups, with few differences: younger age in the sealant group (65.4 versus 68.4 years, p = 0.01) and slightly larger mass size in the suture group (4.0 versus 3.9 cm, p = 0.03). Ischemia time was significantly shorter in the sealant group (21.8 versus 27.0 minutes, p = 0001). Blood loss and transfusion rate (0.8% versus 11.9%, p = 0.0001) were significantly less in the sealant group. A multivariate analysis showed date of surgery and blood loss as the major parameters affecting transfusion rate.
Conclusions: Closing the tumor bed with BioGlue ^® tissue adhesive is feasible, safe, can shorten ischemia time and potentially reduce transfusion rate.
Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.