Literature DB >> 23937616

Margins, ischaemia and complications rate after laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: impact of learning curve and tumour anatomical characteristics.

Francesco Porpiglia1, Riccardo Bertolo, Daniele Amparore, Cristian Fiori.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To present our laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) results according to the margin, ischaemia and complications (MIC) system recently proposed for the standardized reporting of partial nephrectomy (PN) outcomes. To assess the role of learning curve and tumour anatomical characteristics on the outcomes by using MIC system. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were obtained from our prospectively maintained LPN database, including only patients who underwent LPN performed with vascular clamping. According to the MIC system definition, the goal of LPN was reached (i.e. MIC was achieved) when surgical margins were negative, warm ischaemia time (WIT) was <20 min and no major complications occurred. Patients were stratified by quartiles of distribution, named LPN eras 1-4, and MIC rates in different LPN eras were compared, evaluating the impact of learning curve and tumour anatomical characteristics (as assessed by Preoperative Aspects and Dimensions Used for an Anatomical [PADUA] score on the outcomes.
RESULTS: The study population consisted of 206 patients. The overall MIC rate was 63.1%: it progressively increased along the learning curve, reaching 84.9% in LPN era 4 (P < 0.001). PADUA-score risk group categories were inversely correlated with MIC score (P = 0.001). When simultaneously considering the effects of both LPN eras and PADUA-score risk group categories, a trend towards a higher MIC rate was found in the latest series, regardless of tumour anatomical characteristics. When MIC score components were separately analysed, WIT decreased significantly from LPN era 1 to LPN era 4 (P < 0.001) and from PADUA-score risk group categories 3 to 1 (P = 0.001) A trend towards a decrease in the complication rate along the learning curve was observed (P = 0.251), while LPN era and PADUA score together significantly influenced the complications rate (P < 0.001). The positive surgical margin rate was very low (2.9% overall) and stable throughout the case study.
CONCLUSION: The MIC rate increased with surgeon's experience and decreased when complex lesions were treated. The MIC system was found to be an easy, useful and reproducible tool to report LPN data series.
© 2013 The Authors. BJU International © 2013 BJU International.

Entities:  

Keywords:  laparoscopy; partial nephrectomy; renal ischaemia; renal scintigraphy

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23937616     DOI: 10.1111/bju.12317

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


  10 in total

Review 1.  Surgical Margins in Nephron-Sparing Surgery for Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Dean D Laganosky; Christopher P Filson; Viraj A Master
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 3.092

2.  Perioperative outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy for intrarenal tumors.

Authors:  Kevin M Curtiss; Mark W Ball; Michael A Gorin; Kelly T Harris; Phillip M Pierorazio; Mohamad E Allaf
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2014-07-31       Impact factor: 2.942

3.  Good servants, poor masters.

Authors:  Louis-Olivier Gagnon; Martin E Gleave
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 1.862

4.  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

5.  Comparison of Trifecta and Pentafecta Outcomes between T1a and T1b Renal Masses following Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy (RAPN) with Minimum One Year Follow Up: Can RAPN for T1b Renal Masses Be Feasible?

Authors:  Dae Keun Kim; Lawrence H C Kim; Ali Abdel Raheem; Tae Young Shin; Ibrahim Alabdulaali; Young Eun Yoon; Woong Kyu Han; Koon Ho Rha
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-03-17       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Three Different Learning Curves Have an Independent Impact on Perioperative Outcomes After Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Comparative Analysis.

Authors:  Philip Zeuschner; Irmengard Meyer; Stefan Siemer; Michael Stoeckle; Gudrun Wagenpfeil; Stefan Wagenpfeil; Matthias Saar; Martin Janssen
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-07-24       Impact factor: 5.344

7.  Open Partial Nephrectomy with Zero Ischaemia Using a Supra 12th Rib Miniflank Incision: A Minimally Invasive Open Approach for Small Renal Masses.

Authors:  Syed Ali Ehsanullah; Abida Sultana; Brian Kelly; Charlotte Dunford; Zaheer Shah
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2021-12-31

8.  Long-term outcomes of image-guided ablation and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for T1 renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Vinson Wai-Shun Chan; Filzah Hanis Osman; Jon Cartledge; Walter Gregory; Michael Kimuli; Naveen S Vasudev; Christy Ralph; Satinder Jagdev; Selina Bhattarai; Jonathan Smith; James Lenton; Tze Min Wah
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2022-04-06       Impact factor: 7.034

9.  Comparison of the Width of Peritumoral Surgical Margin in Open and Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis.

Authors:  Jong Jin Oh; Jung Keun Lee; Kwangmo Kim; Seok-Soo Byun; Sang Eun Lee; Sung Kyu Hong
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-06-23       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Selective clamping hand-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for localized renal tumors: A novel technique.

Authors:  Bum Sik Tae; Byeong Jo Jeon; Nam Cheol Kim; Hoon Choi; Jae Hyun Bae; Jae Young Park
Journal:  Investig Clin Urol       Date:  2019-02-15
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.