PURPOSE: To evaluate the results of our technique of clampless laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) and its impact as an emerging treatment for small renal masses (SMRs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed our prospectively maintained database: data of 117 patients who consecutively underwent LPN at our Institution from January 2009 to December 2011 were studied. Patients were divided into 2 Groups based on operative technique: Group A: clampless-LPN (cl-LPN); Group B: conventional LPN (clamping of renal artery). Demographic and peri-operative data, complications, pre- and post-operative serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were registered and compared by Student's t- and Chi-square-tests (p-values < 0.05 considered statistically significant). RESULTS: 41 patients were in Group A and 76 in Group B. Groups were comparable in terms of preoperative data except for tumour's size (2.35 ± 1.10 vs. 3.19 ± 1.57, Group A vs. B, respectively, p = 0.0029). Concerning perioperative data, warm ischemia time (WIT) was 0 min. in all Group A cases; mean WIT in Group B was 20.90 ± 9.27 min. One case (2.4%) in Group A (central tumour) was converted to conventional LPN. Mean eGFR postoperative decrease was higher in Group B (0.17 ± 9.30 vs. 4.38 ± 11.37 mL/min., A vs B, respectively, p = 0.0445). CONCLUSIONS: Notwithstanding the limits of the study, our results suggest that cl-LPN is a safe and effective technique, which allows surgeon to surgically treat SRMs even in case of complex location, without injuring kidney by ischemia.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the results of our technique of clampless laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) and its impact as an emerging treatment for small renal masses (SMRs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed our prospectively maintained database: data of 117 patients who consecutively underwent LPN at our Institution from January 2009 to December 2011 were studied. Patients were divided into 2 Groups based on operative technique: Group A: clampless-LPN (cl-LPN); Group B: conventional LPN (clamping of renal artery). Demographic and peri-operative data, complications, pre- and post-operative serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were registered and compared by Student's t- and Chi-square-tests (p-values < 0.05 considered statistically significant). RESULTS: 41 patients were in Group A and 76 in Group B. Groups were comparable in terms of preoperative data except for tumour's size (2.35 ± 1.10 vs. 3.19 ± 1.57, Group A vs. B, respectively, p = 0.0029). Concerning perioperative data, warm ischemia time (WIT) was 0 min. in all Group A cases; mean WIT in Group B was 20.90 ± 9.27 min. One case (2.4%) in Group A (central tumour) was converted to conventional LPN. Mean eGFR postoperative decrease was higher in Group B (0.17 ± 9.30 vs. 4.38 ± 11.37 mL/min., A vs B, respectively, p = 0.0445). CONCLUSIONS: Notwithstanding the limits of the study, our results suggest that cl-LPN is a safe and effective technique, which allows surgeon to surgically treat SRMs even in case of complex location, without injuring kidney by ischemia.
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