Partial nephrectomy provides equivalent oncologic outcomes and better renal function preservation than radical nephrectomy for pathological T3a renal cell carcinoma: A meta-analysis.

Abstract

ABSTRACTPurpose:Radical nephrectomy (RN) is the standard surgical type for pathological stage T3a (pT3a) renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Recently, some studies have suggested equivalence between partial nephrectomy (PN) and RN for oncologic control and have shown the benefits of PN for better renal function. We conducted this meta-analysis to assess oncologic outcomes, perioperative outcomes and renal function between two groups among patients with pT3a RCC.Materials and methods:PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Science Direct, Ovid MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, Embase and Google Scholar were searched for eligible articles. The endpoints of the final analysis included overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), surgical complications, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR).Results:Twelve studies of moderate to high quality, including 14.152 patients, were examined. PN showed superiority for renal functional preservation, providing higher eGFR (WMD=12.48mL/min; 95%CI: 10.28 to 14.67; P <0.00001) and lower serum creatinine (WMD=-0.31mg/dL; 95%CI: −0.40 to −0.21; P <0.00001). There were no significant differences between PN and RN regarding operative time, EBL, surgical complications, OS, RFS and CSS. Despite inherent selection bias, most pooled estimates were consistent in sensitivity analysis and subgroup analysis. More positive margins were found in the PN group (RR=2.42; 95%CI: 1.25-4.68; P=0.009).Conclusions:PN may be more suitable for treating pT3a RCC than RN because it provides a similar survival time (OS or RFS) and superior renal function. Nevertheless, this result is still disputed, and more high-quality studies are required.