BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Angioembolization is often the first-line treatment for patients with renal angiomyolipoma (AML). Regrowth and repeated hemorrhage after embolization, however, remain a concern. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) is the definitive, minimally invasive treatment alternative. We compared the outcomes of LPN in patients who had a diagnosis of AML with patients with other renal tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From a prospective LPN database, we identified patients with a final pathologic diagnosis of AML (group 1). The ability of preoperative imaging to predict AML final pathology results was studied. Surgical and postoperative outcomes in group 1 were compared with the outcomes of the rest of our LPN cohort (group 2). RESULTS: Of 184 LPNs that were performed between 2002 and 2008, 14 (7.6%) patients and 15 renal units had a diagnosis of AML. Two patients underwent concomitant LPN and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for multiple AML lesions. In group 1, only 33% of the patients had a preoperative diagnosis of AML. There were no significant differences in tumor size, age, preoperative estimated creatinine clearance, body mass index, and comorbidities between the groups. The mean estimated blood loss in groups 1 and 2 was 214 mL and 178 mL, respectively (P = 0.5). The complication rates were similar between the groups. With a median follow-up of 15 months, no AML recurrences or bleeding was observed in group 1. CONCLUSIONS: The results of LPN or RFA, when appropriate, in AML patients are comparable to the results of LPN for other renal tumors. The preoperative imaging studies were a poor predictor of AML in patients who were undergoing LPN.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Angioembolization is often the first-line treatment for patients with renal angiomyolipoma (AML). Regrowth and repeated hemorrhage after embolization, however, remain a concern. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) is the definitive, minimally invasive treatment alternative. We compared the outcomes of LPN in patients who had a diagnosis of AML with patients with other renal tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From a prospective LPN database, we identified patients with a final pathologic diagnosis of AML (group 1). The ability of preoperative imaging to predict AML final pathology results was studied. Surgical and postoperative outcomes in group 1 were compared with the outcomes of the rest of our LPN cohort (group 2). RESULTS: Of 184 LPNs that were performed between 2002 and 2008, 14 (7.6%) patients and 15 renal units had a diagnosis of AML. Two patients underwent concomitant LPN and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for multiple AML lesions. In group 1, only 33% of the patients had a preoperative diagnosis of AML. There were no significant differences in tumor size, age, preoperative estimated creatinine clearance, body mass index, and comorbidities between the groups. The mean estimated blood loss in groups 1 and 2 was 214 mL and 178 mL, respectively (P = 0.5). The complication rates were similar between the groups. With a median follow-up of 15 months, no AML recurrences or bleeding was observed in group 1. CONCLUSIONS: The results of LPN or RFA, when appropriate, in AMLpatients are comparable to the results of LPN for other renal tumors. The preoperative imaging studies were a poor predictor of AML in patients who were undergoing LPN.
Authors: Francesco Greco; Riccardo Autorino; Vincenzo Altieri; Steven Campbell; Vincenzo Ficarra; Inderbir Gill; Alexander Kutikov; Alex Mottrie; Vincenzo Mirone; Hendrik van Poppel Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2018-10-13 Impact factor: 24.267
Authors: Raouf M Seyam; Waleed K Alkhudair; Said A Kattan; Mohamed F Alotaibi; Hassan M Alzahrani; Waleed M Altaweel Journal: J Kidney Cancer VHL Date: 2017-10-16