RESULTS OF OPEN AND LAPAROSCOPIC PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMY FOR LOCALIZED RENAL CANCER


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

Aim. To compare the results of laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy. Materials and methods. From February 2000 to June 2016, 178 patients (mean age 58.2 years) with stage T1 kidney tumors underwent partial nephrectomy. This cohort included 106 (59.5%) men and 72 (40.5%) women. Open partial nephrectomy was performed in 102 (57.3%) patients (group 1) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPL) - 76 (42.7%, 2nd group). The majority (92.2%) of patients underwent resection for elective and 14 (7.8%) for absolute indications. Preoperatively, 163 (91.6%) and 15 (8.4%) patients had stage T1a stage T1b, respectively. The tumor size ranged from 2.4 to 6.2 cm and from 2 cm to 5.4 cm in group 1 and 2, respectively. A comparative analysis included operative time, warm ischemia time, blood loss, duration of drainage and the length of hospital stay. Results. Open partial nephrectomy was associated with shorter operative time (105 min versus 125 min) and warm ischemia time (14.5 vs. 20.8 min) compared with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy was characterized by a smaller blood loss (180 ml vs. 365 ml, p<0.05) and a shorter length ofhospital stay (2.5 days vs. 5.6 days, p<0.05). One patient from each group was found to have positive surgical margins. Conclusion. Currently, laparoscopic partial nephrectomy is the method of choice for stage T1 kidney tumors. Despite the comparatively longer operative time and warm ischemia time, laparoscopic partial nephrectomy leads to faster patient recovery and fewer complications.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

B. K Komyakov

I.I. Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University

Email: komyakovbk@mail.ru
Dr.Med.Sci., Prof., Head of Department of Urology Saint-Petersburg, Russia

B. G Guliev

I.I. Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University

Email: gulievbg@mail.ru
Dr.Med.Sci., Prof. at the Department of Urology Saint-Petersburg, Russia

A. I Novikov

I.I. Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University

Dr.Med.Sci., Prof. at the Department of Urology Saint-Petersburg, Russia

Kh. Kh Yagubov

I.I. Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University

Email: khayyam2206@mail.ru
Ph.D. Student at the Department of Urology Saint-Petersburg, Russia

References

  1. Marszalek M., Ponholzer A., Brössner C., Wächter J., Maier U., Madersbacher S. Elective open nephron-sparing surgery for renal masses: Single-center experience with 129 consecutive patients. Urology. 2004;64:38-42.
  2. Alyaev Yu.G., Krapivin A.A. Kidney resection for cancer. M. Meditsina. 2001 ;224 p. Russian (Аляев Ю.Г., Крапивин А.А. Резекция почки при раке. М.: Медицина. 2001;224 с.).
  3. Matveev V.B., Matveev B.P., Volkova M.I., Perlin D.V. The role of organ-sparing surgery for kidney cancer at the present stage. Onkourologiya. 2007;2:5-11. Russian (Матвеев В.Б., Матвеев Б.П., Волкова М.И., Перлин Д.В. Роль органосохраняющего хирургического лечения рака почки на современном этапе. Онкоурология. 2007;2:5-11).
  4. Ljungberg B.H., Kuczyk M.A., Merseburger A.S., et al. Guidelines on renal cell carcinoma. Munich: EAU; 2016. EAU Guideliness. Guideliness on renal cell carcinoma.
  5. Miller D.C., Schonlau M., Litwin M.S., Lai J., Saigal C.S. Renal and cardiovascular morbitidy after partial or radical nephrectomy. Cancer. 2008;112:511-520.
  6. Scosyrev E., Messing E.M., Sylvester R., Campbell S., Van Poppel H. Renal function after nephron-sparing surgery versus radical nephrectomy: Results from EORTC randomized trial 30904. Eur Urol. 2014;65:372-377.
  7. Krebs R.K., Andreoni C., Ortiz V. Impact of radical and partial nephrectomy on renal function in patients with renal cancer. Urol. Int. 2014;92(4):449-454.
  8. Mir M.C., Ercole C., Takagi T., Zhang Z., Velet L., Remer E.M., Demirjian S., Campbell S.C. Decline in renal function after partial nephrectomy: etiology and prevention. J. Urol. 2015;193:1889-1898.
  9. Richstone L., Montag S., Ost M., Reggio E., Permpongkosol S., Kavoussi L.R. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for hilar tumors: Evaluation of short-term oncologic outcome. Urology. 2008;71: 36-40.
  10. Nadu A., Kleinmann N., Laufer M., Dotan Z., Winkler H., Ramon J. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for central tumors: Analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications. J Urol. 2009;181:42-47.
  11. Arvin K.G., Amin S.H., Soroush R.B. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for hilar tumors: Oncologic and renal functional outcomes. Urology. 2014;83:111 - 115.
  12. Orvieto M.A., Chien G.W., Laven B., Rapp D.E., Sokoloff M.H., Shalhav A.L. Eliminating knot tying during warm ischemia time for lap- aroscopic partial nephrectomy. J Urol. 2004;172:2292-2295.
  13. Thompson T., Ng C.F., Tolley D. Renal parenchymal hemostatic aids: Glues and things. CurrOpin Urol. 2003;13:209-214.
  14. Richter F., Schnorr D., Deger S., Trk I., Roigas J., Wille A., Loening S.A. Improvement of hemostasis in open and laparoscopically performed partial nephrectomy using a gelatin matrix-thrombin tissue sealant (FloSeal). Urology. 2003;61:73-77.
  15. Beasley K.A., Al Omar M., Shaikh A., Bochinski D., Khakhar A., Izawa J.I., Welch R.O., Chin J.L., Kapoor A., Luke P.P. Laparoscopic versus open partial nephrectomy. Urology. 2004;64:458-561.
  16. Schiff J.D., Palese M., Vaughan E.D. Jr, Sosa R.E., Coll D., Del Pizzo J.J. Laparoscopic vs open partial nephrectomy in consecutive patients: The Cornell experience. BJU Int. 2005;96:811-814.
  17. Gill I.S., Kavoussi L.R., Lane B.R., Blute M.L., Babineau D., Colombo J.R. Jr, Frank I., Permpongkosol S., Weight C.J., Kaouk J.H., Kattan M.W., Novick A.C. Comparison of 1,800 laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomies for single renal tumors. J Urol. 2007;178:41-46.
  18. Shpot’ U.V., Glybochko P.V., Alyaev Yu.G., Petrovskii D.N. Open and laparoscopic enucleation of renal tumor. Urologiia. 2014;5:67-71. Russian (Шпоть У.В., Глыбочко П.В., Аляев Ю.Г., Петровский Д.Н. Открытая и лапарокопическая энуклеация опухоли почки. Урология. 2014;5:67-71).
  19. Makhoul B., De La Taille A., Vordos D., Salomon L., Sebe P., Audet J.F., RuizL., HoznekA., Antiphon P., CiccoA., Yiou R., Chopin D., Abbou C.C. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for T1 renal cancer: The gold standard? A comparison of laparoscopic vs open nephrectomy. BJU Int. 2004;93:67-70.
  20. Leibovich B.C., Blute M., Cheville J.C., Lohse C.M., Weaver A.L., Zincke H. Nephron sparing surgery for appropriately selected renal cell carcinoma between 4 and 7 cm results in outcome similar to radical nephrectomy. J.Urol. 2004;171:1066-1070.
  21. Janda G., Deal A., Yang H., Nielsen M., Smith A., Pruthi R.S., Wallen E., Woods M., Raynor M. Single-institution experience with robotic partial nephrectomy for renal masses greater than 4 cm. J. Endourol. 2016;30(4):384-389.
  22. GillI.S., Abreu S.C., Desai M.M., Steinberg A.P., Ramani A.P., Ng C., Banks K., Novick A.C., Kaouk J.H. Laparoscopic ice slush renal hypothermia for partial nephrectomy: The initial experience. J Urol. 2003;170:52-56.
  23. Janetschek G., Abdelmaksoud A., Bagheri F., Al-Zahrani H., Leeb K., Gschwendtner M. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in cold ischemia: Renal artery perfusion. J.Urol. 2004;171:68-71.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies