OBJECTIVES: To compare the oncological outcome of patients with pT3 renal tumours treated either by laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) or open RN (ORN). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a retrospective review of a multi-institutional database, we identified 1003 patients with a T3N0M0 renal tumour and with no vena caval invasion. Sixty-five patients treated by LRN were matched with up to four patients treated by ORN. Exact matches were made for age, gender, tumour size, perirenal fat invasion, renal vein invasion, and histological subtype. Following the matching process there were 44 patients treated by LRN and 135 by ORN. Qualitative and continuous variables were compared using chi-square and independent-sample t-tests, respectively. Differences in survival were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method. A Cox regression model was used to test the effect of variables on survival. RESULTS: The two groups were comparable for age (P = 0.4), gender, tumour size (P = 0.4), tumour grade (P = 0.25) and histological subtype (P = 0.45). The mean follow-up was longer in the ORN group (55 vs 28 months, P < 0.001). There was no difference in survival between the ORN and LRN groups in the whole T3 population (P = 0.7), in those with perirenal fat invasion (P = 0.9), or in the subset with renal vein invasion (P = 0.31). In univariate analysis, the only predictor for death from cancer was tumour grade (P = 0.05). In multivariate analysis, no variable was significantly associated with cancer survival. CONCLUSIONS: LRN has no adverse effect on cancer survival compared to ORN in patients with microscopic T3 renal cancer. Additional prospective evaluation is warranted.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the oncological outcome of patients with pT3 renal tumours treated either by laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) or open RN (ORN). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a retrospective review of a multi-institutional database, we identified 1003 patients with a T3N0M0 renal tumour and with no vena caval invasion. Sixty-five patients treated by LRN were matched with up to four patients treated by ORN. Exact matches were made for age, gender, tumour size, perirenal fat invasion, renal vein invasion, and histological subtype. Following the matching process there were 44 patients treated by LRN and 135 by ORN. Qualitative and continuous variables were compared using chi-square and independent-sample t-tests, respectively. Differences in survival were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method. A Cox regression model was used to test the effect of variables on survival. RESULTS: The two groups were comparable for age (P = 0.4), gender, tumour size (P = 0.4), tumour grade (P = 0.25) and histological subtype (P = 0.45). The mean follow-up was longer in the ORN group (55 vs 28 months, P < 0.001). There was no difference in survival between the ORN and LRN groups in the whole T3 population (P = 0.7), in those with perirenal fat invasion (P = 0.9), or in the subset with renal vein invasion (P = 0.31). In univariate analysis, the only predictor for death from cancer was tumour grade (P = 0.05). In multivariate analysis, no variable was significantly associated with cancer survival. CONCLUSIONS: LRN has no adverse effect on cancer survival compared to ORN in patients with microscopic T3 renal cancer. Additional prospective evaluation is warranted.
Authors: Luciano Nunez Bragayrac; Jan Hoffmeyer; Daniel Abbotoy; Kristopher Attwood; Eric Kauffman; Phillipe Spiess; Andrew Wagner; Thomas Schwaab Journal: World J Urol Date: 2016-04-15 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Jasmir G Nayak; Premal Patel; Jennifer Bjazevic; Zhihui Liu; Olli Saarela; Anil Kapoor; Ricardo Rendon; Jun Kawakami; Simon Tanguay; Rodney H Breau; Peter C Black; Darrel E Drachenberg Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2015-12-14 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: A Laird; K C C Choy; H Delaney; M L Cutress; K M O'Connor; D A Tolley; S A McNeill; G D Stewart; A C P Riddick Journal: World J Urol Date: 2014-03-20 Impact factor: 4.226