Literature DB >> 21070570

Comparison of hilar clamping and non-hilar clamping partial nephrectomy for tumours involving a solitary kidney.

Matthew F Wszolek1, Patrick A Kenney, Yoojin Lee, John A Libertino.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: • To compare outcomes of hilar clamping and non-hilar clamping partial nephrectomy for tumours involving a solitary functional kidney. PATIENTS AND METHODS: • Between 1990 and 2009, 104 partial nephrectomies, excluding bench and autotransplant procedures, were performed on solitary functional kidneys. • An institutional review board-approved retrospective review was performed analyzing patient demographics, operative data, complications, oncological outcomes and estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR). • GFR was calculated using the abbreviated Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation. • Preoperative GFR was compared to Early GFR (lowest measured GFR 7-100 days postoperatively) and to Late GFR (GFR 101-365 days postoperatively). • Multiple linear regression analysis was performed to assess covariates affecting Late GFR. • Kaplan-Meier estimator was utilized to compare renal cell carcinoma (RCC) specific survival and non-RCC-related survival.
RESULTS: • In total, 29 partial nephrectomies with hilar clamping and 75 partial nephrectomies without hilar clamping were performed in solitary kidneys. Median follow-up was 57 months. • There was no difference in tumour size, location and the number of tumours resected between the two groups. Mean ischaemia time for the clamping group was 25 min. • Some 97% of the clamping procedures were performed with cold ischaemia. • There was no difference in intra-operative estimated blood loss, transfusion requirement or length of hospital stay. • The complication rate and spectrum of complications were similar between the two groups. • The two groups had similar preoperative GFR and Early GFR. The non-clamping group had a significantly smaller percent decrease in Late GFR (11.8% vs 27.7%, P= 0.01) than the clamping group. • The non-clamping group was significantly more likely to have a less than 10% decrease in Late GFR compared to the clamping group (60.9% vs 17.7%, P= 0.002). • On multivariate analysis, only hilar clamping was significantly associated with decreased Late GFR (estimate 15.0, P= 0.02). • Surgical margin positivity rate was higher in the clamping group (21% vs 4%, P= 0.01); however, the local recurrence rate between the two groups was similar. • The clamping and non-clamping groups had similar 5-year RCC-specific survival and 5-year non-RCC-related survival.
CONCLUSIONS: • Partial nephrectomy without hilar clamping in solitary kidneys provides similar cancer control compared to partial nephrectomy with hilar clamping. • Partial nephrectomy without clamping was associated with superior preservation of Late GFR. • No difference was detected in GFR early after surgery, possibly indicating that there may be ongoing renal loss after hilar clamping.
© 2010 THE AUTHORS. BJU INTERNATIONAL © 2010 BJU INTERNATIONAL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21070570     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09713.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  10 in total

Review 1.  Nonclamping partial nephrectomy: towards improved nephron sparing.

Authors:  Matthew F Wszolek; Patrick A Kenney; John A Libertino
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2011-08-02       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 2.  Partial nephrectomy: is there still a need for open surgery?

Authors:  Varun Sharma; Markus Margreiter
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 3.  Surgical and Minimally Invasive Therapies for the Management of the Small Renal Mass.

Authors:  John Withington; Joana B Neves; Ravi Barod
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 3.092

4.  Are warm ischemia and ischemia time still predictive factors of poor renal function after partial nephrectomy in the setting of elective indication?

Authors:  Thomas Bessede; Pierre Bigot; Jean-Christophe Bernhard; Geraldine Pignot; Fabien Boulière; Gregory Verhoest; Maxime Crépel; Laurent Salomon; Nicolas Mottet; Laurent Bellec; Michel Soulié; Jean-Marie Ferrière; Christian Pfister; Baptiste Albouy; Frederic Pouliot; Thierry Dujardin; Karim Bensalah; Jean-Jacques Patard
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-04-04       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 5.  Positive surgical margins in nephron-sparing surgery: risk factors and therapeutic consequences.

Authors:  Julie Steinestel; Sandra Steffens; Konrad Steinestel; Andres Jan Schrader
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2014-08-08       Impact factor: 2.754

6.  The association between the anatomical features of renal tumours and the functional outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy.

Authors:  Jeong Woo Lee; Sung Yong Cho; Chanhoo Jeon; Kyungtae Ko; Hyeon Hoe Kim
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 1.862

7.  Off-clamp laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for a fat-poor angiomyolipoma arising from the renal capsule: a case report.

Authors:  Koichi Kodama; Yasukazu Takase; Isamu Motoi; Katsuhiko Saito
Journal:  Case Rep Urol       Date:  2012-11-20

8.  Robotic assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy using contrast-enhanced ultrasound scan to map renal blood flow.

Authors:  Ahmad Alenezi; Aamir Motiwala; Susannah Eves; Rob Gray; Asha Thomas; Isabelle Meiers; Haytham Sharif; Hanif Motiwala; Marc Laniado; Omer Karim
Journal:  Int J Med Robot       Date:  2016-03-07       Impact factor: 2.547

Review 9.  Determinant factors for chronic kidney disease after partial nephrectomy.

Authors:  Oscar D Martín; Heilen Bravo; Marcos Arias; Diego Dallos; Yesica Quiroz; Luis G Medina; Giovanni E Cacciamani; Raul G Carlini
Journal:  Oncoscience       Date:  2018-02-23

10.  Comparison of functional outcomes of off-clamp laparoscopic partial nephrectomy access techniques: A preliminary report.

Authors:  Mehmet Necmettin Mercimek; Ender Ozden
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2021 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.541

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.