Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: Long-term outcomes

Current Opinion in Urology

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 139-144

  Borin, James F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Kidney; Laparoscopy; Minimally invasive; Renal cell carcinoma

Indexed keywords

CANCER CONTROL; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER SURVIVAL; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CONVALESCENCE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; KIDNEY CARCINOMA; LAPAROSCOPY; MORBIDITY; NEPHRECTOMY; NEPHROURETERECTOMY; PATIENT SAFETY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REVIEW; THORACOTOMY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TUMOR VOLUME; UROLITHIASIS;

CARCINOMA, RENAL CELL; HUMANS; KIDNEY NEOPLASMS; LAPAROSCOPY; NEPHRECTOMY;

EID: 39849087382     PISSN: 09630643     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e3282f4a851     Document Type: Review

References (26)

1. Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR, Soper NJ, et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy. N Eng J Med 1991; 324:1370-1371.
2. Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR, Soper NJ, et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy: initial case report. J Urol 1991; 146:278-282.
3. Raghuram S, Godbole HC, Dasgupta P. Laparoscopic nephrectomy: the new gold standard? Int J Clin Pract 2005; 59:128-129.
4. Saika T, Ono Y, Hattori R, et al. Long-term outcome of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for pathologic T1 renal cell carcinoma. Urology 2003; 62:1018-1023.
5. Portis AJ, Yan Y, Landman J, et al. Long-term follow-up after laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. J Urol 2002; 167:1257-1262.
6. McDougall EM, Clayman RV, Elashry OM. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal tumor: theWashington University experience. J Urol 1996; 155:1180-1185.
7. Desai MM, Gill IS, Ramani AP, et al. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for cancer with level I renal vein involvement. J Urol 2003; 169:487-491.
8. Steinnerd LE, Vardi IY, Bhayani SB. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal carcinoma with known level I renal vein tumor thrombus. Urology 2007; 69:662-665. This is a retrospective report of LRN by a single surgeon for five patients with level I renal-vein involvement. It demonstrates the feasibility of this approach in experienced hands and provides a good review of the existing literature, which consists mostly of case reports.
9. Romero FR, Muntener M, Bagga HS, et al. Pure laparoscopic radical nephrectomy with level II vena caval thrombectomy. Urology 2006; 68:1112-1114. The online version of this paper has a link to a short video clip of the technique.
10. Walther MM, Lyne JC, Libutti SK, Linehan LM. Laparoscopic cytoreductive nephrectomy as preparation for administration of systemic interleukin-2 in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a pilot study. Urology 1999; 53:496-501.
11. Rabets JC, Kaouk J, Fergany A, et al. Laparoscopic versus open cytoreductive nephrectomy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Urology 2004; 64:930-934.
12. Colombo JR Jr, Haber GP, Aron M, et al. Oncological outcomes of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal cancer. Clinics 2007; 62:251-256. This is a cohort comparison of 88 patients undergoing LRN or ORN for T1 or T2 tumors of 15 cm or less; convalescence favors LRN but there is no difference in long-term outcomes with more than 5-year follow-up.
13. Hemal AK, Kumar A, Kumar R, et al. Laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy for large renal tumors: a long-term prospective comparison. J Urol 2007; 177:862-866. This retrospective comparison of LRN and ORN for 112 T2 tumors (mean size 10 cm) demonstrates short-term advantages for LRN, but no difference in 5-year outcomes.
14. Chung SD, Huang KH, Lai MK, et al. Long-term follow-up of hand-assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for organ-confined renal cell carcinoma. Urology 2007; 69:652-655. This retrospective review of 124 patients undergoing HALRN or ORN demonstrated faster recovery for the former approach, but no difference in long-term survival outcomes.
15. Kawauchi A, Yoneda K, Fujito A, et al. Oncologic outcome of hand-assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. Urology 2007; 69:53-56. This is a multi-institutional retrospective comparison of 123 HALRN with 70 ORN that demonstrates similar long-term outcomes for each. All surgeries were attended by one of two experienced mentors.
16. Miyake H, Hara I, Nakano Y, et al. Hand-assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: comparison with conventional open radical nephrectomy. J Endourol 2007; 21:429-432.
17. Rassweiler J, Tsivian A, Kumar AV, et al. Oncological safety of laparoscopic surgery for urological malignancy: experience with more than 1000 operations. J Urol 2003; 169:2072-2075.
18. Micali S, Celia A, Bove P, et al. Tumor seeding in urological laparoscopy: an international survey. J Urol 2004; 171:2151-2154.
19. Hemal AK, Kumar A, Gupta NP, Kumar R. Oncologic outcome of 132 cases of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy with intact specimen removal for T1-2N0M0 renal cell carcinoma. World J Urol 2007; 25:619-626.
20. Gong EM, Lyon MB, Orvieto MA, et al. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: comparison of clinical Stage T1 and T2 renal tumors. Urology 2006; 68:1183-1187. This retrospective review of 141 patients stratified into T1 and T2 featured a critical appraisal of perioperative complications, which at 25 and 21% respectively are higher than reported in most other series. The authors caution that LRN for tumors over 10 cm is challenging and may lead to more blood loss and the need for urgent or elective conversion to an open procedure.
21. Matin SF, Dhanani N, Acosta M, Wood CG. Conventional and hand-assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: Comparative analysis of 271 cases. J Endourol 2006; 20:891-894. This is a retrospective review of 271 patients demonstrating the safety and short-term efficacy of each technique. HALRN had shorter operating-room times whereas LRN produced less postoperative pain and shorter hospital stay.
22. Berglund RK, Gill IS, Babineau D, et al. A prospective comparison of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy in the extremely obese patient. BJU Int 2007; 99:871-874. With the largest series to date of LRN in the morbidly obese, this retrospective review demonstrated shorter convalescence for the transperitoneal approach.
23. Burgess NA, Koo BC, Calvert RC, et al. Randomized trial of laparoscopic v open nephrectomy. J Endourol 2007; 21:610-613. The only randomized trial reported this year, this study demonstrated less postoperative pain and shorter convalescence in the laparoscopic group.
24. Mattar K, Finelli A. Expanding the indications for laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. Curr Opin Urol 2007; 17:88-92. This is an excellent review of the current state of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for advanced disease.
25. 3b renal-cell carcinoma: more than 2-year follow-up. J Endourol 2007; 21:408-410. This article reviews the technique and outcomes for six patients who underwent LRN for right-sided renal carcinoma involving the renal vein. There were no conversions and mean blood loss was 100 ml. At 27 months follow-up five patients were disease-free, and one had a chest recurrence.
26. Blute ML, Leibovich BC, Lohse CM, et al. The Mayo Clinic experience with surgical management, complications and outcome for patients with renal cell carcinoma and venous tumour thrombus. BJU Int 2004; 94:33-41.