Literature DB >> 22405593

Systematic review of oncological outcomes following surgical management of localised renal cancer.

Steven MacLennan1, Mari Imamura, Marie C Lapitan, Muhammad Imran Omar, Thomas B L Lam, Ana M Hilvano-Cabungcal, Pam Royle, Fiona Stewart, Graeme MacLennan, Sara J MacLennan, Steven E Canfield, Sam McClinton, T R Leyshon Griffiths, Börje Ljungberg, James N'Dow.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) accounts for 2-3% of adult malignancies. There remain uncertainties over the oncological outcomes for the surgical management of localised RCC.
OBJECTIVE: Systematically review relevant literature comparing oncological outcomes of surgical management of localised RCC (T1-2N0M0). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Relevant databases including Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched up to October 2010, and an updated scoping search was performed up to January 2012. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs, prospective observational studies with controls, retrospective matched-pair studies, and comparative studies from well-defined registries/databases were included. The main outcomes were overall survival, cancer-specific survival, recurrence, and metastases. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess RCTs, and an extended version was used to assess nonrandomised studies (NRSs). The quality of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 4580 abstracts and 389 full-text articles were assessed. Thirty-four studies met the inclusion criteria (6 RCTs and 28 NRSs). Meta-analyses were planned but were deemed inappropriate due to data heterogeneity. There were high risks of bias and low-quality evidence across the evidence base. Open radical nephrectomy and open partial nephrectomy showed similar cancer-specific and overall survival, but when both open and laparoscopic approaches are considered together, the evidence showed improved survival for partial nephrectomy for tumours ≤4cm. The overall evidence suggests either equivalent or better survival with partial nephrectomy. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy offered equivalent survival to open radical nephrectomy, and all laparoscopic approaches achieved equivalent survival. Open and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy achieved equivalent survival. The issue of ipsilateral adrenalectomy or complete lymph node dissection with radical nephrectomy or partial nephrectomy remains unresolved.
CONCLUSIONS: The evidence base suggests localised RCCs are best managed by nephron-sparing surgery where technically feasible. However, the current evidence base has significant limitations due to studies of low methodological quality marked by high risks of bias.
Copyright © 2012 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22405593     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.02.039

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  80 in total

Review 1.  Nephron-sparing surgery for Wilms tumor: A systematic review.

Authors:  Rand N Wilcox Vanden Berg; Emily N Bierman; Megan Van Noord; Henry E Rice; Jonathan C Routh
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2015-08-05       Impact factor: 3.498

2.  Trends in Renal-Cell Carcinoma Incidence and Mortality in the United States in the Last 2 Decades: A SEER-Based Study.

Authors:  Anas M Saad; Mohamed M Gad; Muneer J Al-Husseini; Inas A Ruhban; Mohamad Bassam Sonbol; Thai H Ho
Journal:  Clin Genitourin Cancer       Date:  2018-10-11       Impact factor: 2.872

3.  Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for localized renal tumors: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xiaolong Zhang; Jiajun Yan; Yu Ren; Chong Shen; Xiangrong Ying; Shouhua Pan
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2014-12-15

Review 4.  Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery in kidney surgery: clinical experience and future perspectives.

Authors:  Panagiotis Kallidonis; Stavros Kontogiannis; Iason Kyriazis; Ioannis Georgiopoulos; Abdulrahman Al-Aown; Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg; Evangelos Liatsikos
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 5.  Decision Making: Thermal Ablation Options for Small Renal Masses.

Authors:  Colin J McCarthy; Debra A Gervais
Journal:  Semin Intervent Radiol       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 1.513

6.  Clear cell changes in mucinous tubular and spindle cell carcinoma: cytoplasmic pallor/clearing within tubules, vacuoles or hybrid conventional clear cell carcinoma of kidney?

Authors:  Wanli Cao; Baoxing Huang; Xiaochun Fei; Xin Huang; Jun Dai; Wenlong Zhou; Zhaoping Xu; Hengchuan Su; Kang Cheng; Fukang Sun
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Pathol       Date:  2014-06-15

7.  Da Vinci Xi and Si platforms have equivalent perioperative outcomes during robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: preliminary experience.

Authors:  Ali Abdel Raheem; Abulhasan Sheikh; Dae Keun Kim; Atalla Alatawi; Ibrahim Alabdulaali; Woong Kyu Han; Young Deuk Choi; Koon Ho Rha
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2016-06-24

8.  Perioperative and renal functional outcomes of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) for renal tumours of high surgical complexity: a single-institute comparison between clampless and clamped procedures.

Authors:  Paolo Verze; Paolo Fedelini; Francesco Chiancone; Vito Cucchiara; Roberto La Rocca; Maurizio Fedelini; Clemente Meccariello; Alessandro Palmieri; Vincenzo Mirone
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-06-20       Impact factor: 4.226

9.  Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy with diode laser: a promising technique.

Authors:  Nikola Knezevic; Tomislav Kulis; Marjan Maric; Marija Topalovic Grkovic; Ivan Krhen; Zeljko Kastelan
Journal:  Photomed Laser Surg       Date:  2014-01-24       Impact factor: 2.796

10.  Use of self-retaining barbed sutures decreases cold ischemia time in open nephron-sparing surgery.

Authors:  Ingrid Schauer; Oliver Theimer; Tobias Klatte; Matthias Waldert; Hans-Christoph Klingler; Markus Margreiter
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2014-03-21       Impact factor: 1.704

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.