Dataset Information

Value of Partial Nephrectomy for Renal Cortical Tumors of cT2 or Greater Stage: A Risk-benefit Analysis of Renal Function Preservation Versus Increased Postoperative Morbidity.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Indications for partial nephrectomy (PN) have expanded to include larger tumors. Compared with radical nephrectomy (RN), PN reduces the risk of chronic kidney disease but is associated with higher morbidity.

Objective

To explore whether the benefit of PN (preservation of estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] ≥60ml/min/1.73m² 1yr postoperatively) over RN is offset by higher morbidity for cT2-cT3a tumors.

Design, setting, and participants

A total of 1921 patients with renal cortical tumors who underwent nephrectomy between 2000 and 2012 were analyzed, with 297 having clinical stage T2 or higher disease.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

Multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for age, tumor size, and comorbidities were used to calculate the risk of complications within 90d and the risk of low eGFR across a range of tumor sizes. Models were created separately for RN and PN, and the difference between risk estimates was calculated.

Results and limitations

For tumors with diameters between 7 and 12cm, the risk of eGFR downgrade associated with RN was higher than the risk of complications associated with PN. The magnitude of the risk of eGFR downgrade was similar to the magnitude of complications risk across all tumor sizes. Our analysis was performed at a single institution, and used only tumor size to compare the risk and benefits of surgery.

Conclusions

Our study suggests that PN is associated with higher eGFR preservation than RN for cT2 or greater renal tumors. The magnitude of this advantage offsets the higher morbidity observed with PN.

Patient summary

When treating a large kidney tumor, it is difficult to decide whether it is better to remove the whole kidney or remove just the tumor. The second option improves postoperative renal function but is more complex. We tried to find whether there is a tumor size at which one technique should be used over the other.

SUBMITTER: Vilaseca A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8407532 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPartial nephrectomy and radical nephrectomy are the relevant surgical therapy options for localised renal cell carcinoma. However, debate regarding the effects of these surgical approaches continues and it is important to identify and summarise high-quality studies to make surgical treatment recommendations.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of partial nephrectomy compared with radical nephrectomy for clinically localised renal cell carcinoma.Search methodsWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, BIOSIS, LILACS, Scopus, two trial registries and abstracts from three major conferences to 24 February 2017, together with reference lists; and contacted selected experts in the field.Selection criteriaWe included a randomised controlled trial comparing partial and radical nephrectomy for participants with small renal masses.Data collection and analysisOne review author screened all of the titles and abstracts; only citations that were clearly irrelevant were excluded at this stage. Next, two review authors independently assessed full-text reports, identified relevant studies, evaluated the eligibility of the studies for inclusion, assessed trial quality and extracted data. The update of the literature search was performed by two independent review authors. We used Review Manager 5 for data synthesis and data analyses.Main resultsWe identified one randomised controlled trial including 541 participants that compared partial nephrectomy to radical nephrectomy. The median follow-up was 9.3 years.Based on low quality evidence, we found that time-to-death of any cause was decreased using partial nephrectomy (HR 1.50, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.18). This corresponds to 79 more deaths (5 more to 173 more) per 1000. Also based on low quality evidence, we found no difference in serious adverse events (RR 2.04, 95% CI 0.19 to 22.34). Findings are consistent with 4 more surgery-related deaths (3 fewer to 78 more) per 1000.Based on low quality evidence, we found no difference in time-to-recurrence (HR 1.37, 95% CI 0.58 to 3.24). This corresponds to 12 more recurrences (14 fewer to 70 more) per 1000. Due to the nature of reporting, we were unable to analyse overall rates for immediate and long-term adverse events. We found no evidence on haemodialysis or quality of life.Reasons for downgrading related to study limitations (lack of blinding, cross-over), imprecision and indirectness (a substantial proportion of patients were ultimately found not to have a malignant tumour). Based on the finding of a single trial, we were unable to conduct any subgroup or sensitivity analyses.Authors' conclusionsPartial nephrectomy may be associated with a decreased time-to-death of any cause. With regards to surgery-related mortality, cancer-specific survival and time-to-recurrence, partial nephrectomy appears to result in little to no difference.

Project description:BackgroundSeveral predictive factors for chronic kidney disease (CKD) following radical nephrectomy (RN) or partial nephrectomy (PN) have been identified. However, early postoperative laboratory values were infrequently considered as potential predictors. Therefore, this study aimed to develop predictive models for CKD 1 year after RN or PN using early postoperative laboratory values, including serum creatinine (SCr) levels, in addition to preoperative and intraoperative factors. Moreover, the optimal SCr sampling time point for the best prediction of CKD was determined.MethodsData were retrospectively collected from patients with renal cell cancer who underwent laparoscopic or robotic RN (n = 557) or PN (n = 999). Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative factors, including laboratory values, were incorporated during model development. We developed 8 final models using information collected at different time points (preoperative, postoperative day [POD] 0 to 5, and postoperative 1 month). Lastly, we combined all possible subsets of the developed models to generate 120 meta-models. Furthermore, we built a web application to facilitate the implementation of the model.ResultsThe magnitude of postoperative elevation of SCr and history of CKD were the most important predictors for CKD at 1 year, followed by RN (compared to PN) and older age. Among the final models, the model using features of POD 4 showed the best performance for correctly predicting the stages of CKD at 1 year compared to other models (accuracy: 79% of POD 4 model versus 75% of POD 0 model, 76% of POD 1 model, 77% of POD 2 model, 78% of POD 3 model, 76% of POD 5 model, and 73% in postoperative 1 month model). Therefore, POD 4 may be the optimal sampling time point for postoperative SCr. A web application is hosted at https://dongy.shinyapps.io/aki_ckd .ConclusionsOur predictive model, which incorporated postoperative laboratory values, especially SCr levels, in addition to preoperative and intraoperative factors, effectively predicted the occurrence of CKD 1 year after RN or PN and may be helpful for comprehensive management planning.