Dataset Information

Zero ischemia laparoscopic microwave ablation assisted enucleation vs. laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in clinical T1a renal tumor: a randomized clinical trial

ABSTRACT:

Background

The study aims to evaluate efficiency, safety and the functional outcomes of zero ischemia laparoscopic microwave ablation assisted tumor enucleation (LMWATE) in comparison with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) for cT1a renal tumors.

Methods

A prospective randomized controlled trial on cT1a renal tumor patients treated by laparoscopic nephron sparing surgeries between October 2014 to September 2017 was conducted. Tumor enucleation was performed in the LMWATE group after microwave ablation (MWA) without hilar clamping. The endpoint was the affected kidney’s change of GFR measured by renal scintigraphy at the 3rd month and 12th month postoperatively. All the patients were followed up for at least 12 months. The Student t-test, Wilcoxon rank sum tests and Pearson Chi-square or Fisher exact were applied to analyse data.

Results

The number of patients enrolled in the LMWATE group and LPN group were 90 and 93 respectively. Patients in the LPN group showed much more decline of effect kidney glomerular filtration rate at 3 months (10.3 vs. 17.4, P<0.001) and 12 months postoperatively (8.8 vs. 10.2, P=0.023) when compared to the LMWATE group. Additionally, in the LMWATE group, considerably shorter median operation duration (91 vs. 112 minutes, P<0.001), lower median estimated blood loss (82.5 vs. 117.5 mL, P<0.001) and shorter hospital stay (5.5 vs. 6 days, P=0.013) were observed but with similar postoperative complications in both groups. There was no positive margin or local recurrence in both groups.

Conclusions

Zero ischemia LMWATE may provide better preservation of renal function, decrease operative time and blood loss compared to LPN with similar complication rates.

SUBMITTER: Wu X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8798795 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare long-term outcomes and peri-operative outcomes of image-guided ablation (IGA) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN).Material and methodsThis is a retrospective cohort study of localised RCC (T1a/bN0M0) patients undergoing cryoablation (CRYO), radio-frequency ablation (RFA), or LPN at our institution from 2003 to 2016. Oncological outcomes were compared using Cox regression and log-rank analysis. eGFR changes were compared using Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon-rank tests.ResultsA total of 296 (238 T1a, 58 T1b) consecutive patients were identified; 103, 100, and 93 patients underwent CRYO, RFA, and LPN, respectively. Median follow-up time was 75, 98, and 71 months, respectively. On univariate analysis, all oncological outcomes were comparable amongst CRYO, RFA, and LPN (p > 0.05). On multivariate analysis, T1a patients undergoing RFA had improved local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) (HR 0.002, 95% CI 0.00-0.11, p = 0.003) and metastasis-free survival (HR 0.002, 95% CI 0.00-0.52, p = 0.029) compared to LPN. In T1a and T1b patients combined, both CRYO (HR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01-0.73, p = 0.026) and RFA (HR 0.04, 95% CI 0.03-0.48, p = 0.011) had improved LRFS rates. Patients undergoing CRYO and RFA had a significantly smaller median decrease in eGFR post-operatively compared to LPN (T1a: p < 0.001; T1b: p = 0.047). Limitations include retrospective design and limited statistical power.ConclusionsIGA is potentially as good as LPN in oncological durability. IGA preserves kidney function significantly better than LPN. More studies with larger sample size should be performed to establish IGA as a first-line treatment alongside LPN.Key points• Ablative therapies are alternatives to partial nephrectomy for managing small renal cell carcinomas. • This study reports long-term outcomes of image-guided ablation versus partial nephrectomy. • Ablative therapies have comparable oncological durability and better renal function preservation compared to partial nephrectomy.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of intraoperative ultrasonography in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) for intrarenal tumors.Patients and methodsAll patients who underwent LPN for renal tumors in our institution from January 2010 to October 2016 were assessed retrospectively. Patients were divided into two groups, the first with totally intrarenal tumors (TIT group), defined as a solid renal mass with no exophytic element on both preoperative and intraoperative evaluations, and the second with exophytic tumors (control group). General information and perioperative data of the two groups were compared, including tumor characteristics, operative time, estimated blood loss, warm ischemia time and pathological findings. Intraoperative laparoscopic ultrasonography (ILUS) was used to precisely locate and delineate the TIT border, as well as seeking for other suspected lesions.ResultsWe identified 583 patients who underwent LPN in our center, including 46 in the TIT and 537 in the control group. All patients in the TIT group were evaluated by ILUS, and all TIT procedures were successfully performed with only one conversion to open surgery. The mean tumor sizes in the TIT and control groups were 2.42 ± 0.46 cm and 3.29 ± 1.43 cm (p < 0.001), respectively. The TIT group's R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score was higher than that of the control group (median 8.5 vs 6.0, p < 0.001), and their mean operation times were 127.2 ± 16.0 min and 120.1 ± 19.2 min, respectively. Mean estimated blood loss was higher in the TIT than in the control group (161.3 ml vs 136.6 ml, p = 0.003). Mean warm ischemia time differed in the TIT and control groups (22.2 ± 6.4 vs 20.6 ± 4.7 min, p = 0.105), but not significantly. Rates of open conversion and positive margins, as well as rates of major postoperative complications, pathological findings, and 1-month changes in renal function, were similar in the two groups.ConclusionIntraoperative ultrasonography is technically feasible in patients undergoing LPN for TITs. This method may reduce the need for radical nephrectomy in patients with endogenic renal masses.

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.