Open Radical Nephrectomy Group Research Articles

Survival after minimally invasive vs. open radical nephrectomy for stage I and II renal cell carcinoma

A recently reported phase III randomized trial comparing open and minimally invasive hysterectomy showed significantly higher rates of local recurrence after minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for cervical cancer. This raised concerns regarding patterns of recurrences and survival after MIS in general. This study aims to determine the effect of MIS on all-cause mortality among patients undergoing radical nephrectomy for Stage I and II renal cell carcinoma (RCC). We utilized the National Cancer Database to identify patients diagnosed with clinical stage I-II RCCs between 2010 and 2013. Patients for whom a laparoscopic or robotic radical nephrectomy was attempted were compared to patients who underwent open radical nephrectomy (ORN). Adjusted regression models with inverse probability propensity score weighting (IPW) were utilized to identify independent predictors of receiving MIS. All-cause mortality rates were compared using IPW survival functions and log-rank tests. Adjusted Cox proportional hazard models were fitted to determine independent predictors of OS. 27,642 patients were identified; 11,524 (41.7%) had MIS, while 16,118 (58.3%) had ORN. Kaplan-Meier survival curves in the IPW cohort showed significant OS advantage for patients who underwent MIS (p < 0.001). Furthermore, length of hospital stays (3 vs. 4days), 30day readmission rates (2.4 vs. 2.87%), 30day (0.53 vs. 0.96%) and 90day mortality rates (1.04 vs. 1.77%) were significantly higher in the ORN group (p < 0.001). MIS was associated with better OS outcomes compared to ORN for stage I and II RCC. In addition, MIS had lower post-operative readmission, 30- and 90day mortality rates.

PD64-02 SURVIVAL AFTER MINIMALLY INVASIVE VERSUS OPEN RADICAL NEPHRECTOMY FOR STAGE I AND II RENAL CELL CARCINOMA

You have accessJournal of UrologyKidney Cancer: Localized: Surgical Therapy VI (PD64)1 Sep 2021PD64-02 SURVIVAL AFTER MINIMALLY INVASIVE VERSUS OPEN RADICAL NEPHRECTOMY FOR STAGE I AND II RENAL CELL CARCINOMA Furkan Dursun, Ahmed Elshabrawy, Hanzhang Wang, Ronald Rodriguez, Dharam Kaushik, and Ahmed M. Mansour Furkan DursunFurkan Dursun More articles by this author , Ahmed ElshabrawyAhmed Elshabrawy More articles by this author , Hanzhang WangHanzhang Wang More articles by this author , Ronald RodriguezRonald Rodriguez More articles by this author , Dharam KaushikDharam Kaushik More articles by this author , and Ahmed M. MansourAhmed M. Mansour More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002108.02AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: A phase III randomized trial comparing open and minimally invasive hysterectomy showed significantly higher rates of local recurrence after minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for cervical cancer. This raised concerns regarding patterns of recurrences after MIS in general. This study aims to determine the effect of MIS on all-cause mortality among patients undergoing radical nephrectomy (RN) for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). METHODS: We utilized the National Cancer Database to identify patients diagnosed with clinical stage I and II RCCs between 2010 and 2013. Patients for whom a laparoscopic or robotic RN was attempted (including patients whose surgery was converted to open) were compared to patients who underwent open radical nephrectomy (ORN). Multivariable adjusted regression models with inverse probability propensity score weighting (IPW) were utilized to identify independent predictors of receiving MIS. All-cause mortality rates were compared using IPW survival functions and log-rank tests. Multivariable weighed Cox proportional hazard models were fitted to determine independent predictors of OS. RESULTS: Overall, 27,642 patients were identified; 11,524 (41.7%) had MIS, while 16,118 (58.3%) had an ORN. Treatment at academic centers (odds ratio [OR] 1.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.62–1.91, p<0.001) and having highest quartile median household income (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.3–1.53, p<0.001) were associated with an increased likelihood of having MIS. Conversely, African American race (OR 0.88, CI 0.81–0.95, p=0.001) and clinical T2 disease (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.55–0.61, p<0.001) were associated with a decreased likelihood of having MIS. At a median follow up of 44.7 months, Kaplan Meier survival curves in the propensity score weighed cohort showed OS advantage for patients who underwent MIS (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.8–0.87, p<0.001) (Table 1). Furthermore, length of hospital stay (3 vs. 4 days), 30-day readmission rates (2.4% vs. 2.87%), 30-day mortality rates (0.53% vs. 0.96%) and 90-day mortality rates (1.04% vs. 1.77%) were significantly higher in the ORN group (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: After propensity score weighing, MIS was associated with better 3-year overall survival compared to ORN for stage I and II RCC. Additionally, MIS had lower post-operative readmission, 30- and 90-day mortality rates. Source of Funding: None © 2021 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 206Issue Supplement 3September 2021Page: e1143-e1144 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2021 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Furkan Dursun More articles by this author Ahmed Elshabrawy More articles by this author Hanzhang Wang More articles by this author Ronald Rodriguez More articles by this author Dharam Kaushik More articles by this author Ahmed M. Mansour More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Loading ...

Prospective analysis of laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy for renal tumours more than 7 cm.

Aims:To analyse the feasibility of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) for renal tumours >7 cm and to compare the operative and oncologic outcomes with open radical nephrectomy (ORN).Settings and Design:This was a prospective, observational, comparative study.Subjects and Methods:The study was conducted at a tertiary care super-speciality hospital. All the patients who underwent radical nephrectomy for >7 cm renal tumours during a period of 2 years (April 2012 to May 2014) were included in the study. Thirty patients were included in each ORN and LRN group. Pre-operative, intra-operative and post-operative data for all these patients were collected and analysed.Statistical Analysis Used:Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS, version 11.0 for Windows, Chicago, IL).Results:Mean age of patients in ORN and LRN groups was 57.3 ± 6.1 years and 54.9 ± 5.7 years, respectively (P = 0.220). As compared to ORN, LRN had less drop in post-operative haemoglobin (1.39 ± 0.55 g/dl vs. 4.07 ± 1.023 g/dl, P < 0.05), less drop in haematocrit value (4.7 ± 3.25% vs. 9.5 ± 5.13%, P < 0.05), less analgesic requirement for tramadol hydrochloride (165 ± 74.5 mg vs. 260 ± 181.66 mg) and less mean hospital stay (4.2 days vs. 6.1 days, P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in post-operative complication rate and recurrence-free survival over a median follow-up of 17 months (93.9% – LRN vs. 90% – ORN)Conclusions:LRN for large renal tumours is feasible and achieves oncologic outcomes similar to that obtained with ORN.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Radical Nephrectomy for Renal Cell Carcinoma: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to summarize and quantify the current evidence on the therapeutic efficacy of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) compared with open radical nephrectomy (ORN) in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in a meta-analysis. METHODS: Data were collected by searching Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect for reports published up to September 26, 2016. Studies that reported data on comparisons of therapeutic efficacy of LRN and ORN were included. The fixed-effects model was used in this meta-analysis if there was no evidence of heterogeneity; otherwise, the random-effects model was used. RESULTS: Thirty-seven articles were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis showed that the overall mortality was significantly lower in the LRN group than that in the ORN group (odds ratio [OR] =0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.95). However, there was no statistically significant difference in cancer-specific mortality (OR=0.77, 95% CI: 0.55-1.07), local tumor recurrence (OR=0.86, 95% CI: 0.65-1.14), and intraoperative complications (OR=1.27, 95% CI: 0.83-1.94). The risk of postoperative complications was significantly lower in the LRN group (OR=0.71, 95% CI: 0.65-0.78). In addition, LRN has been shown to offer superior perioperative results to ORN, including shorter hospital stay days, time to start oral intake, and convalescence time, and less estimated blood loss, blood transfusion rate, and anesthetic consumption. CONCLUSION: LRN was associated with better surgical outcomes as assessed by overall mortality and postoperative complications compared with ORN. LRN has also been shown to offer superior perioperative results to ORN.

LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL NEPHRECTOMY FOR LARGE RENAL CELL CARCINOMA: RETROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS OF SAFETY AND ONCOLOGICAL OUTCOME.

(Objectives) To evaluate the safety and oncologic efficacy of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) >7 cm, we retrospectively reviewed the clinical outcome and long-term cancer control of patients who underwent LRN in comparison to open radical nephrectomy (ORN). (Patients and methods) The clinical records of 79 patients with RCC >7 cm, who underwent radical nephrectomy (37 LRN; 42 ORN) between 1993 and 2014, were reviewed. (Results) The 2 groups (LRN and ORN) were comparable regarding age, body mass index and mean tumor size (86.5 mm vs. 94.6 mm).The operative time was significantly longer in the LRN group than ORN group (204 min vs. 168 min; p<0.05) and blood loss was significantly lower in the LRN group than in the ORN group (144 ml vs. 930 ml; p<0.05).No statistically significant difference was found in complication rate (10.8% vs. 23.8%) and the 2-year recurrence-free survival rate (85.6% vs. 83.8%). (Conclusion) Despite the longer operative time, LRN for large RCC was associated with lower blood loss. This study provides evidence of the safety and efficacy of LRN for large RCC.

Effect of retroperitoneal laparoscopic operation on immune function and neuroendocrine function in patients with renal cell carcinoma

Objective To explore the effect of retroperitoneal laparoscopic operation on immune function and neuroendocrine function in patients with renal cell carcinoma,and to evaluate clinical efficacy of retroperitoneal laparoscopic operation in treatment of renal cell carcinoma.Methods The clinical data of 36 patients subject to laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) and 27 patients with open radical nephrectomy (ORN) for renal cell carcinoma in our department from January 2010 to January 2013 were analyzed retrospectively.The renal cell carcinoma was diagnosed by preoperative ultra-sound,CT or MRI,and postoperative pathological examination.The clinical stage was T1-T2,and N0M0 in all patients.The diameter of tumors ranged 2.3-9.8 cm (5.6 cm on average),and tumor was solitary.The efficacy was evaluated by the duration of operative time,blood loss during operation and postoperative hospital stay between two groups.The changes of immune function (CD3+,CD4+,CD8+,CD4+/CD8+) and neuroendocrine function [β-endorphin,Adrenocorticotrophin (ACTH),cortisol] in patients with renal cell carcinoma before and after surgical operation were examined.Results The 63 patients were operated successfully,and there were no severe perioperative complications.Blood loss during operation was (95.0 ± 29.5) ml in LRN group and (112.8 ±31.3) ml in ORN group (P ＜0.05).The mean postoperative hospital stay was (7.1 ± 1.3) days in LRN group and (8.7 ± 1.7) days in ORN group (P＜0.05).No significant difference in operative time was noted between two groups (P ＞ 0.05).After surgical operation,the proportion of CD3 +,CD4+ and CD4 +/CD8 + in LRN group was significantly higher than in ORN group (P ＜0.05),and the levels of β-endorphin,ACTH and cortisol in LRN group were significantly lower than those in control group (P ＜0.05).Average postoperative follow-up duration was 14 months (range 3-33) in 61 patients.Imaging examinations showed no recurrence or metastasis in all patients,and no patients had longterm complication.Conclusion Retroperitoneal laparoscopic operation has advantages of clearer vision,less trauma,less blood loss,faster postoperative recovery,and shorter hospital stay.In the treatment of localized renal cell carcinoma,LRN has more advantages than ORN because LRN can protect immune function better and reduce stress response better. Key words: Renal cell carcinoma ; Laparoscopic operation ; Radical nephrectomy ; Immune function

Comparison between laparoscopic and open radical nephrectomy for the treatment of primary renal tumors in children: Single-center experience over a 5-year period

ObjectivesTo compare the outcomes of laparoscopic nephrectomy (LN) with open radical nephrectomy (ORN) in the management of consecutive pediatric neoplasms. Patients and methodsRetrospective cohort study of consecutive children treated for primary renal tumors between 2006 and 2011, segregated based on surgical modality (LN/ORN). Pre-, intra- and postoperative data and outcomes were collected. ResultsDemographics from the 45 patients (13 LN, 32 ORN) were similar, and tumors in the LN group were smaller [6.59 ± 1.8 cm vs. 10.99 ± 2.99 cm ORN (p < 0.05)]. Six patients had preoperative chemotherapy (two LN, four ORN). No tumor ruptures occurred with either technique. Wilms tumor (seven LN, 24 ORN) was the most common diagnosis, followed by renal cell carcinoma (four LN, four ORN). Procedure length was similar between groups (282 ± 79 LN, 263 ± 81 min ORN). Mean length of stay was significantly shorter for LN (2.9 vs. 5.9 days; p = 0.002). Postoperative narcotic requirements and use of nasogastric tube were higher in the ORN group. After a median follow-up of 18 (LN) and 33 months (ORN), 1 and 4 recurrences occurred, respectively. ConclusionsLN is an attractive alternative to open surgery in carefully selected cases of pediatric renal tumors. Procedure length and incidence of intra-operative rupture were not increased, while post-operative recovery and hospital stay were shorter for LN. Longer follow-up is mandatory to confirm comparable oncological outcomes to ORN.

Long-term oncologic outcomes of hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic radical nephrectomy to treat clinically localized renal cell carcinoma

To evaluate the long-term oncological outcomes of hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic radical nephrectomy (HARRN) for treating clinically localized renal cell carcinoma. We retrospectively collected and analyzed the data and clinical outcomes of 46 patients who underwent HARRN and 50 patients who underwent conventional open radical nephrectomy (ORN) at our institution for clinical localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The median follow-up period of the HARRN group was 56.5 months (range: 14.6-78.7 months); for the ORN group, the median follow-up period was 110.8 months (range: 15.5-123 months). Patient age, sex, body mass index, pathologic parameters, and classification based on the guidelines of the American Society of Anesthesiologists were not significantly different between the two groups. The HARRN group had a significantly longer operative time (218 minutes vs. 178 minutes, p=0.003) and less blood loss (203mL vs. 670mL, p<0.001). The complication rates of the ORN and HARRN groups were similar (8% and 4.3%, respectively, p=0.46). No conversions to an open procedure or intraoperative mortality occurred in the HARRN group. The disease-free and disease-specific survival rates were comparable between the two groups. The results of our study indicate that HARRN is a feasible, minimally invasive treatment for managing clinically organ-confined RCC with a good long-term oncological outcome.

Oncological Outcome of Contemporary Radical Nephrectomy for pT1 Renal Cell Carcinoma: Comparison of Open versus Laparoscopic Approach

Background: This study retrospectively compared cancer control in patients with pT1 renal cell carcinoma (RCC) undergoing either open radical nephrectomy (ORN) or laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN). Patients and Methods: This study included 710 consecutive patients who underwent radical nephrectomy for clinically localized RCC at 21 institutions in Japan between January 2000 and March 2008, and were diagnosed as having pT1 disease. The medical records of all patients were reviewed with emphasis on their oncological outcomes. Results: Of the 710 patients, 436 (61.4%) and 274 (38.6%) were treated with ORN and LRN, respectively. Although patient age in the ORN group was significantly older than that in the LRN group, there were no significant differences in the remaining characteristics, including gender distribution, mode of presentation, pathological stage, grade, micro-venous invasion and histological subtype, between the two groups. None of the patients in the LRN group developed port site metastasis, while renal fossa recurrence occurred in 2 patients in both the ORN and LRN groups. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in the recurrence-free, cancer-specific and overall survival rates between these two groups. Conclusions: LRN had no adverse impact on intermediateterm oncological outcomes compared with that after ORN in patients with pT1 RCC; however, additional prospective trials would be needed to draw definitive conclusions on this issue.

Laparoscopic versus Open Radical Nephrectomy in T2 Renal Cell Carcinoma: Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes

PurposeLaparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) has become the standard technique for radical nephrectomies for T1 renal tumors (7 cm or less). We extended our experience with LRN to T2 renal tumors (greater than 7 cm) and compared the efficacy and long-term oncologic outcomes with those of open radical nephrectomy (ORN) for T2 clear renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the same period.Materials and MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the data from 33 patients who underwent LRN and 35 patients who underwent ORN in our institution from January 2003 to June 2006 for T2N0M0 RCC. We compared long-term oncologic outcomes between the two groups.ResultsThe median follow-up periods were 60.0 months (range, 48.0-77.0 months) and 65.6 months (range, 56.0-77.0 months) in the LRN and ORN groups, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in the patients' demographic data. There were no significant differences in the 5-year overall survival rate, the cancer-specific survival rate, or the recurrence-free survival rate.ConclusionsOur results suggest that LRN for the management of T2 RCC is feasible and efficacious and that the long-term oncologic outcomes of LRN are comparable to those of ORN.

Comparison of laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy for large renal tumors: a retrospective analysis of multi‐center results

• To assess the feasibility and oncologic efficacy of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) compared with open radical nephrectomy (ORN) in patients with large renal cell carcinomas (RCCs) > 7 cm in size. • We analysed the data from 255 patients who underwent radical nephrectomies at 26 institutions in Korea between January 2000 and December 2007 for RCCs > 7 cm in size. • Eighty-eight patients who underwent LRNs were compared with 167 patients who underwent ORNs. The patients with tumor thrombi in the renal vein or IVC, and lymph node or distant metastases were excluded. • We compared the operative time, estimated blood loss, complication rates, and 2-year overall and disease-free survival rates between the LRN and ORN groups. • The median duration of postoperative follow-up was 19 months for the LRN group and 25.8 months for the ORN group. • The operative time was significantly longer in the LRN group than in the ORN group (241.5 ± 74.8 min vs 202.7 ± 69.6 min, P < 0.001) and blood loss was significantly lower in the LRN group than in the ORN group (439.8 ± 326.8 mL vs 604.4 ± 531.4 mL, P = 0.006). • No statistically significant difference was found in complication rates, the 2-year overall (92.7% vs 94%, P = 0.586) and disease-specific (90.1% vs 93.7%, P = 0.314) survival rates between the LRN and ORN groups. • Despite the longer operative time, LRN was an effective and less invasive treatment option for clinical T2 renal tumors. It achieved a degree of cancer control similar to that obtained with ORN.

Comparison of Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy and Open Radical Nephrectomy for Pathologic Stage T1 and T2 Renal Cell Carcinoma With Clear Cell Histologic Features: A Multi-institutional Study

To assess the oncologic efficacy of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) compared with open radical nephrectomy (ORN) in patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC). We analyzed the data from 2561 patients who had undergone radical nephrectomy for RCC at 26 institutions in Korea from June 1998 to December 2007. The clinical data of 631 patients with clear cell RCC in the LRN group were compared with the clinical data of 924 patients in the ORN group. The patients with Stage pT3 or greater and those with lymph node or distant metastases were excluded to avoid a selection bias. To evaluate the technical adequacy and oncologic outcome, we compared the perioperative parameters and 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates. The operative time was significantly longer in the LRN group than in the ORN group (219 ± 77 vs 182 ± 62 minutes, P < .001), but the estimated blood loss and complication rate were significantly lower in the LRN group than in the ORN group (P < .001 and P < .001, respectively). On univariate analysis, the LRN group had 5-year overall (93.5% vs 89.8%, P = .120) and recurrence-free (94.0% vs 92.8%, P = .082) survival rates equivalent to those of the ORN group. Even after adjusting for age, sex, T stage, tumor grade, and body mass index in a Cox proportional hazards model, statistically significant differences between the 2 groups were not found for the 5-year overall (hazard ratio 1.523, P = .157) and recurrence-free (hazard ratio 0.917, P = .773) survival rates. Our large multi-institutional data have shown that LRN provides survival outcomes equivalent to those of ORN in patients with Stage pT1-T2 clear cell RCC.

Comparison of Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy with Open Radical Nephrectomy for pT1-2 Clear Cell Renal-Cell Carcinoma: A Multi-Institutional Study

This multiinstitutional report assesses the oncologic efficacy of hand-assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (HLRN) compared with open radical nephrectomy (ORN) in patients with localized clear cell renal-cell carcinoma (RCC). We analyzed the data from 2561 patients who underwent radical nephrectomy at 26 institutions in Korea between June 1998 and December 2007 for localized RCC. One hundred ninety-seven patients with clear cell RCC in the HLRN group were compared with 917 patients with clear cell RCC in the ORN group. To evaluate the technical adequacy and oncologic outcome, we compared the operative time, estimated blood loss, and 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates. The median follow-up was 36 months for the HLRN group and 27 months for the ORN group. The operative time was significantly longer in the HLRN group than in the ORN group (206.8 +/- 68.7 minutes vs. 179.1 +/- 61.5 minutes, p < 0.001), and blood loss was significantly lower in the HLRN group than in the ORN group (311.6 +/- 238.7 mL vs. 372.4 +/- 367.3 mL, p = 0.003). There was no significant difference in pathologic T stage and Fuhrman's nuclear grade in the two groups. No statistically significant difference was found in the 5-year overall (91.2% vs. 90.3%, p = 0.286) and disease-specific (95.2% vs. 92.1%, p = 0.222) survival rates between the HLRN and ORN groups. Despite the longer operative time, HLRN was an effective and less-invasive treatment option for localized clear cell RCC. HLRN could achieve cancer control similar to that obtained with ORN.

RADIATION THERAPY FOR PROSTATE CANCER INCREASES THE RISK OF RECTAL CANCER

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to summarize and quantify the current evidence on the therapeutic efficacy of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) compared with open radical nephrectomy (ORN) in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in a meta-analysis. METHODS: Data were collected by searching Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect for reports published up to September 26, 2016. Studies that reported data on comparisons of therapeutic efficacy of LRN and ORN were included. The fixed-effects model was used in this meta-analysis if there was no evidence of heterogeneity; otherwise, the random-effects model was used. RESULTS: Thirty-seven articles were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis showed that the overall mortality was significantly lower in the LRN group than that in the ORN group (odds ratio [OR] =0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.95). However, there was no statistically significant difference in cancer-specific mortality (OR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.55-1.07), local tumor recurrence (OR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.65-1.14), and intraoperative complications (OR = 1.27, 95% CI: 0.83-1.94). The risk of postoperative complications was significantly lower in the LRN group (OR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.65-0.78). In addition, LRN has been shown to offer superior perioperative results to ORN, including shorter hospital stay days, time to start oral intake, and convalescence time, and less estimated blood loss, blood transfusion rate, and anesthetic consumption. CONCLUSION: LRN was associated with better surgical outcomes as assessed by overall mortality and postoperative complications compared with ORN. LRN has also been shown to offer superior perioperative results to ORN.

Oncological and Surgical Outcomes of Pure Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy and Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy for pT1 Renal Cell Carcinoma: Comparison with Open Radical Nephrectomy

Purpose: We compared the surgical and oncologic outcomes of pure laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (PLRN) and hand-assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (HLRN) with those of open radical nephrectomy (ORN) in patients with pT1 renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Materials and Methods: Between 1999 and 2007, a total of 269 patients underwent PLRN (n=77), HLRN (n=87), and ORN (n=105) for pT1 RCC. Follow-up data consisted of clinical, pathologic, and oncologic results and were reviewed retrospectively. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were constructed for progression and survival endpoints. Results: Mean operative time was 184.0, 164.0, and 132.6 minutes (p< 0.001); mean estimated blood loss was 196.7, 147.8, and 232.6 ml (p<0.001); and mean postoperative hospital stay was 5.7, 7.2, and 7.8 days (p<0.001) for the PLRN, HLRN and ORN groups, respectively. The major complication rate after surgery was 2.6%, 2.3%, and 3.8%, respectively (p=0.807). Median follow-up periods were 32 months in the PLRN group, 48 months in the HLRN group, and 37 months in the ORN group. Five-year progression-free survival was 97.4%, 96.6%, and 98.1% (p=0.557), and 5-year cancer-specific survival was 98.7%, 96.6%, and 98.1% (p=0.508), respectively. Conclusions: PLRN and HLRN are safe treatment options with comparable oncologic results to ORN for pT1 RCC. (Korean J Urol 2009;50:457-462) 󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏

Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy in Obese and Non-Obese Patients: Comparison with Open Surgery

Purpose: The aim of this research was to compare surgical outcomes and complications of obese and non-obese patients who underwent open radical nephrectomy (ORN) and laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN). Materials and Methods: The data of 26 ORN patients and 30 LRN patients between January 2006 and December 2008 were analyzed. Patients with a body mass index (BMI) of 25.0 kg/m or more were defined as obese, and those with a BMI of <25.0 kg/m were defined as non-obese. All patients were divided into two groups according to the criteria above to compare demographic and clinical and pathologic parameters. Results: The mean BMIs of the 15 obese patients in the ORN group and the 13 obese patients in the LRN group were 26.8±1.1 and 27.7±2.4, respectively. LRN was enormously effective for lowering estimated blood loss (EBL) and postoperative days compared with ORN. Operation times and EBL in ORN were affected by obesity, both of which were increased. In contrast, the data of both LRN groups indicated similar outcomes. The perioperative data of obese patients revealed LRN to have reduced blood loss (143.0±62.7 vs. 446.7±222.4 ml, p=0.001) and not significantly different postoperative days (7.3±2.2 vs. 8.4±1.5 days, p=0.065). Operation time, however, did not differ significantly among obese patients between ORN and LRN. The complications due to LRN had no relation with obesity, whereas ORN had an increased complications rate (34.6% vs. 3.8%). Conclusions: This study shows that LRN is more effective than ORN for both obese and non-obese patients with regard to perioperative outcomes and complication rates. (Korean J Urol 2009;50:1003-1008) 󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏󰠏

Seven Years After Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy: Oncologic and Renal Functional Outcomes

To compare the long-term oncologic and renal function outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic (LRN) versus open radical nephrectomy (ORN). The medical records of 116 patients undergoing radical nephrectomy for pathologically confirmed renal cell carcinoma before January 2000 were reviewed. Of these 116 patients, 63 underwent LRN and 53 ORN. The oncologic and renal functional data were obtained from the patient charts, radiographic reports, and direct telephone calls to the patients or their families. The median follow-up was 65 months (range 19 to 92) in the LRN group and 76 months (range 8 to 105) in the ORN group. LRN was successfully completed in all patients without open conversion. The mean tumor size was 5.4 cm in the LRN group and 6.4 cm in the ORN group (P = 0.007). The 5-year overall survival (78% versus 84%, respectively; P = 0.24), cancer-specific survival (91% versus 93%, respectively; P = 0.75), and recurrence-free survival (91% versus 93%, respectively; P = 0.75) rates were similar between the LRN and ORN groups. At 7 years, the overall survival (72% versus 84%; P = 0.24), cancer-specific survival (91% versus 93%; P = 0.75), and recurrence-free survival (91% versus 93%; P = 0.75) rates were also comparable. No port site recurrence was noted in the laparoscopic group. The long-term renal function outcomes were similar in the LRN and ORN groups, with serum creatinine increasing by 33% and 25%, and the estimated creatinine clearance decreasing by 31% and 23% from baseline, respectively. Chronic renal insufficiency developed in 4% of patients in each group. The results of our study have shown that LRN and ORN have comparable long-term oncologic and renal functional outcomes.

ONCOLOGICAL OUTCOMES OF LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL NEPHRECTOMY FOR RENAL CANCER

To report the 5-year oncological outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal cancer compared to a cohort of patients undergoing open radical nephrectomy. We retrospectively analyzed the data of 88 patients undergoing radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma prior to January 2000. Of these, 45 patients underwent laparoscopic radical nephrectomy, and 43 patients underwent open radical nephrectomy. Inclusion criteria comprised clinically organ-confined tumors of 15 cm or less in size without concomitant lymphadenopathy or vena cava thrombus. Oncological follow-up data were obtained from charts, radiological reports, and phone calls to patients or their families, and were calculated from the date of surgery to the date of last appointment with physician or date of death. All laparoscopic procedures were completed without open conversion. On comparing the laparoscopic radical nephrectomy and open radical nephrectomy groups, mean tumor size was 5. 8 vs 6.2 cm (P = . 44), mean blood loss was 183 vs 461 mL (P = . 004), and mean operative time was 2.8 vs 3.7 hrs (P < . 001). Over a mean follow-up of 5 years in the laparoscopic radical nephrectomy group and 6 years in the open radical nephrectomy group, the overall survival was 81% vs 79% (P = . 47), and cancer-specific survival was 90% vs 92% (P = . 70) , respectively. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal cancer confers equivalent 5-year oncological outcomes to those of open surgery.

Long-Term Follow-up of Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy for Organ-Confined Renal Cell Carcinoma

To evaluate the efficacy and long-term outcomes of hand-assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (HALRN) in treating clinically localized renal cell carcinoma. We analyzed the data from 54 patients who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (HALRN) and 70 patients who underwent conventional open radical nephrectomy (ORN) in our institution from January 1998 to December 2002 for clinical Stage T1N0M0 or T2N0M0 renal cell carcinoma. The data were collected retrospectively by reviewing the medical records. All specimens were confirmed by pathologic examination. We compared the surgical results and long-term oncologic outcomes between the two groups. The median follow-up period in the HALRN group was 44.5 months (range 16 to 73) and in the ORN group it was 68 months (range 43 to 93). Patient age, sex, body mass index, pathologic parameters, and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification were not significantly different between the two groups. The HALRN group had a significantly longer operative time (204 minutes versus 181 minutes, P = 0.03) and less blood loss (161 mL versus 630 mL, P <0.01). The complication rates for the ORN and HALRN groups were similar (10% and 7.4% respectively, P = 0.62). No conversions to an open procedure or intraoperative mortality occurred in the HALRN group. The average hospital stay, length of wound, and parenteral narcotic analgesic dose were significantly less in the HALRN group. The 5-year disease-free rate and disease-specific survival rate were comparable in the two groups. The results of our study have shown that HALRN is a less-invasive technique with 5-year disease-free and disease-specific survival rates comparable to those after ORN in treating patients with clinically localized renal cell carcinoma.

Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy: Comparison with Conventional Open Radical Nephrectomy

To compare the outcomes of hand-assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (HALRN) with those of open radical nephrectomy (ORN) for renal-cell carcinoma (RCC). A total of 130 patients with stage T(1) or T(2) RCC with a maximum diameter < 10 cm underwent radical nephrectomy by HALRN (n = 63) or ORN (n = 67). Data from these two groups were reviewed retrospectively. Although the maximum tumor size treated by HALRN was significantly less than that treated by ORN, there were no significant differences in the remaining features of the two groups. One HALRN was converted to open surgery. The mean operative time for HALRN (273 minutes) was significantly longer than that for ORN (189 minutes), whereas the mean estimated blood loss (315 v 381 mL). There were significant differences in measures of postoperative recovery, including time to walking (1.4 days for HALRN v 2.2 days for ORN), time to oral intake (1.8 v 3.3 days), and time to grant of permission for hospital discharge (7.4 v 10.2 days). Postoperative complications were observed in one and four patients in the HALRN and ORN groups, respectively. There were no significant differences in the recurrence-free and cancer-specific survival rates in the two groups. Despite the longer operative time, HALRN represents an effective, safe, and less-invasive treatment option for RCC. If performed for the proper indications, HALRN could achieve cancer control similar to that available with ORN.