Literature DB >> 15780357

Comparison of nephron-sparing surgery in central versus peripheral renal tumors.

Michael Mullerad1, Alexander Kastin, Prasad S Adusumilli, Boaz Moskovitz, Edmond Sabo, Ofer Nativ.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the feasibility of nephron-sparing surgery (NSS) in patients with centrally located tumors.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 118 patients who underwent NSS between 1993 and 2002 (35 patients with centrally located tumors and 83 with peripherally located tumors) was performed. Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed to evaluate freedom from local recurrence and disease-specific survival in patients with conventional histologic subtype tumors. The Wilcoxon test was used to compare the curves (two-tailed P < or =0.05 was considered to be statistically significant).
RESULTS: Intraoperatively, in patients with centrally located tumors, the need to close the collecting system (P = 0.035) and for blood transfusions (P = 0.033) was greater. Two perioperative deaths occurred in patients with peripherally located tumors. Two patients with centrally located tumors subsequently underwent nephrectomy. Of the patients with centrally located tumors, 1 patient had a positive margin, 2 patients had local recurrence, and 1 patient developed metastasis. No positive surgical margins or local recurrence was found in patients with peripherally located tumors, although 4 patients developed distant metastasis. Kaplan-Meier curves for patients with conventional histologic subtype tumors demonstrated a statistically significant difference for local recurrence (P = 0.04), but not for survival (P = 0.71). The mean follow-up time was 38.8 and 43.8 months for patients with centrally located and peripherally located tumors, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: NSS can be used to postpone, or eliminate the need for, nephrectomy in 94.3% of patients with centrally located tumors and can achieve oncologic disease control similar to that for exophytic lesions. These data indicate that NSS should be considered even for patients with centrally located tumors, taking into account that performing such surgery is a challenging task.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15780357     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2004.10.063

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  5 in total

1.  Pitfalls in the diagnosis and treatment of fat-poor angiomyolipoma of the renal pelvis mimicking urothelial carcinoma: report of three rare cases.

Authors:  Fang Xie; Jiming Zhao; Fajuan Cheng; Zhigang Yao; Bin Zheng; Zhihong Niu; Wei He
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2022-07-15       Impact factor: 3.940

2.  Open partial nephrectomy for entirely intraparenchymal tumors: a matched case-control study of oncologic outcome and complication rate.

Authors:  Piotr Zapala; Bartosz Dybowski; Nina Miazek; Piotr Radziszewski
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2017 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.541

3.  Pathological diagnostic nomograms for predicting malignant histology and unfavorable pathology in patients with endophytic renal tumor.

Authors:  Xinxi Deng; Xiaoqiang Liu; Bing Hu; Ming Jiang; Ke Zhu; Jianqiang Nie; Taobin Liu; Luyao Chen; Wen Deng; Bin Fu; Situ Xiong
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-09-21       Impact factor: 5.738

Review 4.  Open partial nephrectomy for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Brian Shuch; John S Lam; Arie S Belldegrun
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 2.862

5.  Difference of opinion - Which is the best treatment on a 2 cm complete endophitic tumor on the posterior side of the left kidney? Opinion: Robotic partial nephrectomy.

Authors:  Juan Arriaga; Rene Sotelo
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2016 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.541

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.