PURPOSE: Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy has emerged as a standard of care in appropriate candidates with clinical stage T1 renal tumors (7 cm or less). Herein we present our experience with laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for clinical stage T2 tumors (greater than 7 cm). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients undergoing laparoscopic radical nephrectomy between September 1997 and July 2003 were retrospectively subdivided into group LAPT1-166 with tumor size 7 cm and group LAPT2-65 with tumor size greater than 7 cm. Also, group LAPT2 was compared with a group of 34 contemporary, comparable patients undergoing open radical nephrectomy for tumor greater than 7 cm (group OPENT2). RESULTS: Compared with group LAPT1, group LAPT2 had younger patients, larger tumors and greater blood loss (100 vs 200 ml) (each p <0.001). Importantly operative time, analgesic requirements, hospital stay, and convalescence and complication rates were comparable. Group LAPT2 and group OPENT2 patients had similar sized tumors (9.2 and 9.9 cm, respectively) but shorter operative time (p = 0.03), lesser blood loss (p <0.001), shorter hospital stay (p <0.001) and more rapid convalescence (p = 0.02) occurred in LAPT2. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for stage T2 renal masses (greater than 7 cm) is feasible and efficacious. Laparoscopic nephrectomy offers the advantages of decreased blood loss, shorter hospital stay and more rapid recovery over open radical nephrectomy for comparable tumors greater than 7 cm. Although surgical outcomes are comparable with laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for smaller tumors (7 cm or less), adequate laparoscopic experience is necessary before performing radical nephrectomy for large T2 tumors.
PURPOSE: Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy has emerged as a standard of care in appropriate candidates with clinical stage T1 renal tumors (7 cm or less). Herein we present our experience with laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for clinical stage T2 tumors (greater than 7 cm). MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients undergoing laparoscopic radical nephrectomy between September 1997 and July 2003 were retrospectively subdivided into group LAPT1-166 with tumor size 7 cm and group LAPT2-65 with tumor size greater than 7 cm. Also, group LAPT2 was compared with a group of 34 contemporary, comparable patients undergoing open radical nephrectomy for tumor greater than 7 cm (group OPENT2). RESULTS: Compared with group LAPT1, group LAPT2 had younger patients, larger tumors and greater blood loss (100 vs 200 ml) (each p <0.001). Importantly operative time, analgesic requirements, hospital stay, and convalescence and complication rates were comparable. Group LAPT2 and group OPENT2 patients had similar sized tumors (9.2 and 9.9 cm, respectively) but shorter operative time (p = 0.03), lesser blood loss (p <0.001), shorter hospital stay (p <0.001) and more rapid convalescence (p = 0.02) occurred in LAPT2. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for stage T2 renal masses (greater than 7 cm) is feasible and efficacious. Laparoscopic nephrectomy offers the advantages of decreased blood loss, shorter hospital stay and more rapid recovery over open radical nephrectomy for comparable tumors greater than 7 cm. Although surgical outcomes are comparable with laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for smaller tumors (7 cm or less), adequate laparoscopic experience is necessary before performing radical nephrectomy for large T2 tumors.
Authors: Mas Jewett; A Finelli; C Kollmannsberger; L Wood; L Legere; J Basiuk; C Canil; D Heng; N Reaume; S Tanguay; M Atkins; G Bjarnason; J Dancey; M Evans; N Fleshner; M Haider; A Kapoor; R Uzzo; D Maskens; D Soulieres; G Yousef; N Basappa; N Bendali; P Black; N Blais; I Cagiannos; M Care; R Chow; H Chung; P Czaykowski; D Derosa; K Durrant; S Ellard; G Farquharson; C Filion-Brulotte; J Gingerich; L Godbout; R Grant; W Hamilton; W Kassouf; G Kurban; K Lane; Jb Lattouf; D Lau; M Leveridge; J McCarthy; R Moore; S North; P O'brien; E Pituskin; P Racine; R Rendon; A So; S Sridhar; K Stubbs; Z Su; L Taylor; T Udall; P Venner; W Vogel; S Yap; P Yau; M Cooper; N Giroux; D Miron; D Mosher; K Ross; J Willacy Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Ricardo A Rendon; Anil Kapoor; Rodney Breau; Michael Leveridge; Andrew Feifer; Peter C Black; Alan So Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Se Yun Kwon; Jae Jun Bae; Jung Gon Lee; Seock Hwan Choi; Bum Soo Kim; Eun Sang Yoo; Tae Gyun Kwon; Tae-Hwan Kim Journal: Korean J Urol Date: 2011-08-22