Jean-Alexandre Long1,2, Jean-Christophe Bernhard3, Pierre Bigot4, Cecilia Lanchon5, Philippe Paparel6, Nathalie Rioux-Leclercq7, Laurence Albiges8, Thomas Bodin9, François-Xavier Nouhaud10, Romain Boissier11, Pierre Gimel12, Arnaud Méjean13, Alexandra Masson-Lecomte14, Nicolas Grenier15, Francois Cornelis15, Yohann Grassano3, Vincent Comat3, Quentin Come Le Clerc16, Jérome Rigaud16, Laurent Salomon14, Jean-Luc Descotes5, Christian Sengel17, Morgan Roupret18, Gregory Verhoest19, Idir Ouzaid20, Valentin Arnoux21, Karim Bensalah19. 1. Urology Department, Grenoble University Hospital, 38043, Grenoble, France. JALong@chu-grenoble.fr. 2. TIMC-IMAG Laboratory, UMR CNRS 5525, Grenoble, France. JALong@chu-grenoble.fr. 3. Urology Department, Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux, France. 4. Urology Department, Angers University Hospital, Angers, France. 5. Urology Department, Grenoble University Hospital, 38043, Grenoble, France. 6. Urology Department, Lyon-Sud University Hospital, Pierre-Bénite, France. 7. Pathology Department, Rennes University Hospital, Rennes, France. 8. Oncology Department, Gustave Roussy Institute, Paris, France. 9. Prado-Louvain Urology Center, Marseille, France. 10. Urology Department, Rouen University Hospital, Rouen, France. 11. Urology Department, La Conception University Hospital, Marseille, France. 12. Urology Department, Medipole, Cabestany, France. 13. Urology Department, Georges Pompidou University Hospital, Paris, France. 14. Urology Department, Mondor University Hospital, Creteil, France. 15. Radiology Department, Bordeaux University Hospital, Pessac, France. 16. Urology Department, Nantes University Hospital, Nantes, France. 17. Radiology Department, Grenoble University Hospital, La Tronche, France. 18. Urology Department, La Pitie-Salpetriere University Hospital, Paris, France. 19. Urology Department, Rennes University Hospital, Rennes, France. 20. Urology Department, Bichat University Hospital, Paris, France. 21. Urology Department, Annecy-Genevois Hospital, Metz-Tessy, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare partial nephrectomy (PN) and percutaneous ablative therapy (AT) for renal tumor in imperative indication of nephron-sparing technique (NST). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2000 and 2015, 284 consecutive patients with a kidney tumor in an imperative indication of NST were retrospectively included in a multicenter study. PN [open (n = 146), laparoscopic (n = 9), or robotic approach (n = 17)] and AT [radiofrequency ablation (n = 104) or cryoablation (n = 8)] were performed for solitary kidney (n = 146), bilateral tumor (n = 78), or chronic kidney disease (CKD) (n = 60). RESULTS: Patients in the PN group had larger tumors and a higher RENAL score. There were no differences between the two groups with respect to age, reasons for imperative indication, and preoperative eGFR. Patients in the AT group had a higher ASA and CCI. PN had worse outcomes than AT in terms of transfusion rate, length of stay, and complication rate. Local radiological recurrence-free survival was better for PN, but metastatic recurrence was similar. Percentage of eGFR decrease was similar in the two groups. Temporary or permanent dialysis was not significantly different. On multivariate analysis, PN and AT had a similar eGFR change when adjusted for tumor complexity, reason of imperative indication and CCI. CONCLUSION: In imperative indication of nephron-sparing treatment for a kidney tumor, either PN or AT can be proposed. PN offers the ability to manage larger and more complex tumors while providing a better local control and a similar renal function loss.
PURPOSE: To compare partial nephrectomy (PN) and percutaneous ablative therapy (AT) for renal tumor in imperative indication of nephron-sparing technique (NST). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2000 and 2015, 284 consecutive patients with a kidney tumor in an imperative indication of NST were retrospectively included in a multicenter study. PN [open (n = 146), laparoscopic (n = 9), or robotic approach (n = 17)] and AT [radiofrequency ablation (n = 104) or cryoablation (n = 8)] were performed for solitary kidney (n = 146), bilateral tumor (n = 78), or chronic kidney disease (CKD) (n = 60). RESULTS:Patients in the PN group had larger tumors and a higher RENAL score. There were no differences between the two groups with respect to age, reasons for imperative indication, and preoperative eGFR. Patients in the AT group had a higher ASA and CCI. PN had worse outcomes than AT in terms of transfusion rate, length of stay, and complication rate. Local radiological recurrence-free survival was better for PN, but metastatic recurrence was similar. Percentage of eGFR decrease was similar in the two groups. Temporary or permanent dialysis was not significantly different. On multivariate analysis, PN and AT had a similar eGFR change when adjusted for tumor complexity, reason of imperative indication and CCI. CONCLUSION: In imperative indication of nephron-sparing treatment for a kidney tumor, either PN or AT can be proposed. PN offers the ability to manage larger and more complex tumors while providing a better local control and a similar renal function loss.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cryoablation; Imperative indication; Partial nephrectomy; Radiofrequency; Renal cancer
Authors: Borje Ljungberg; Karim Bensalah; Steven Canfield; Saeed Dabestani; Fabian Hofmann; Milan Hora; Markus A Kuczyk; Thomas Lam; Lorenzo Marconi; Axel S Merseburger; Peter Mulders; Thomas Powles; Michael Staehler; Alessandro Volpe; Axel Bex Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2015-01-21 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Vincent Trudeau; Andreas Becker; Florian Roghmann; Shahrokh F Shariat; Luis Alex Kluth; Nawar Hanna; Al'a Abdo; Giorgio Gandaglia; Zhe Tian; Paul Perrotte; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Maxine Sun Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: R Houston Thompson; Tom Atwell; Grant Schmit; Christine M Lohse; A Nicholas Kurup; Adam Weisbrod; Sarah P Psutka; Suzanne B Stewart; Matthew R Callstrom; John C Cheville; Stephen A Boorjian; Bradley C Leibovich Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2014-08-06 Impact factor: 20.096