PURPOSE: To evaluate the oncologic results of our operative technique, hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic nephroureterectomy (HRNU), for the treatment of upper-tract urothelial cancer, various perioperative parameters and oncologic outcomes were compared for HRNU and conventional open nephroureterectomy (CONU). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-six patients with clinical stage T(1,2)N(0)M(0) renal-pelvic and ureteral tumors underwent HRNU. A retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy was carried out with hand assistance via a lower-abdominal midline incision. The lower ureter was resected by open surgery through the same incision, and the operative specimen was extracted via the same incision. Thirty-seven cases of CONU were reviewed as historical controls. Various perioperative and parameters and oncologic results were compared for the two procedures. RESULTS: The HRNU was completed in all but one case, which was converted to CONU. The mean operating time (395 minutes) was longer than that for CONU (289 minutes), and the mean estimated blood loss with HRNU (497 g) was greater than that with CONU (296 g). The mean time to oral intake (1.4 days) was shorter than that after CONU (2.3 days), and the mean time to walking was shorter (2.1 days v 2.6 days). There were no statistical differences in the cause-specific survival rate, the disease-free survival rate, or the bladder recurrence-free survival rate between HRNU (median follow-up 23 months) and CONU (median follow-up 56 months). CONCLUSION: The HRNU, a combination of endoscopic and conventional open surgery, seems to be a reasonable surgical procedure, because the lower-abdominal incision can be utilized, not only as a route for hand assistance, but also as a window for open surgery when resecting the distal ureter as well as for extraction of surgical specimens. The procedure is a safe alternative to conventional open surgery for upper urinary-tract tumors from an oncologic viewpoint.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the oncologic results of our operative technique, hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic nephroureterectomy (HRNU), for the treatment of upper-tract urothelial cancer, various perioperative parameters and oncologic outcomes were compared for HRNU and conventional open nephroureterectomy (CONU). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-six patients with clinical stage T(1,2)N(0)M(0) renal-pelvic and ureteral tumors underwent HRNU. A retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy was carried out with hand assistance via a lower-abdominal midline incision. The lower ureter was resected by open surgery through the same incision, and the operative specimen was extracted via the same incision. Thirty-seven cases of CONU were reviewed as historical controls. Various perioperative and parameters and oncologic results were compared for the two procedures. RESULTS: The HRNU was completed in all but one case, which was converted to CONU. The mean operating time (395 minutes) was longer than that for CONU (289 minutes), and the mean estimated blood loss with HRNU (497 g) was greater than that with CONU (296 g). The mean time to oral intake (1.4 days) was shorter than that after CONU (2.3 days), and the mean time to walking was shorter (2.1 days v 2.6 days). There were no statistical differences in the cause-specific survival rate, the disease-free survival rate, or the bladder recurrence-free survival rate between HRNU (median follow-up 23 months) and CONU (median follow-up 56 months). CONCLUSION: The HRNU, a combination of endoscopic and conventional open surgery, seems to be a reasonable surgical procedure, because the lower-abdominal incision can be utilized, not only as a route for hand assistance, but also as a window for open surgery when resecting the distal ureter as well as for extraction of surgical specimens. The procedure is a safe alternative to conventional open surgery for upper urinary-tract tumors from an oncologic viewpoint.