Alberto Jurado1, Agustin Romeo2, Guillermo Gueglio1, Patricio Garcia Marchiñena1. 1. Urology Department, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Juan D. Perón 4190, C1181ACH, Buenos Aires, Argentina. 2. Urology Department, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Juan D. Perón 4190, C1181ACH, Buenos Aires, Argentina. agustin.romeo@hospitalitaliano.org.ar.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the evidence regarding the current trends in surgical management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with inferior vena cava (IVC) thrombosis. Recent published series have shown the role of minimally invasive surgery in IVC thrombectomy. This review article evaluates the present RCC with venous extent literature to assess the role of open and minimally invasive surgery in this scenario. RECENT FINDINGS: Robotic urological surgery has shown to have known benefits in radical prostatectomy, partial nephrectomy, and pyeloplasty. Recent published series showed feasibility of robotic IVC thrombectomy even for level IV cases. With growing number of robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgeries worldwide, there is a current tendency to treat this complex and challenging pathology with a minimally invasive approach, without compromising oncological outcomes.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the evidence regarding the current trends in surgical management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with inferior vena cava (IVC) thrombosis. Recent published series have shown the role of minimally invasive surgery in IVC thrombectomy. This review article evaluates the present RCC with venous extent literature to assess the role of open and minimally invasive surgery in this scenario. RECENT FINDINGS: Robotic urological surgery has shown to have known benefits in radical prostatectomy, partial nephrectomy, and pyeloplasty. Recent published series showed feasibility of robotic IVC thrombectomy even for level IV cases. With growing number of robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgeries worldwide, there is a current tendency to treat this complex and challenging pathology with a minimally invasive approach, without compromising oncological outcomes.
Authors: R V Clayman; L R Kavoussi; N J Soper; S M Dierks; S Meretyk; M D Darcy; F D Roemer; E D Pingleton; P G Thomson; S R Long Journal: J Urol Date: 1991-08 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Juan I Martínez-Salamanca; William C Huang; Isabel Millán; Roberto Bertini; Fernando J Bianco; Joaquin A Carballido; Gaetano Ciancio; Carlos Hernández; Felipe Herranz; Axel Haferkamp; Markus Hohenfellner; Brian Hu; Theresa Koppie; Claudio Martínez-Ballesteros; Francesco Montorsi; Joan Palou; J Edson Pontes; Paul Russo; Carlo Terrone; Humberto Villavicencio; Alessandro Volpe; John A Libertino Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2010-10-13 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Luciano A Nunez Bragayrac; Daniel Abbotoy; Kristopher Attwood; Fadi Darwiche; Jan Hoffmeyer; Eric C Kauffman; Thomas Schwaab Journal: J Endourol Date: 2016-06-17 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: George Lee Martin; Erik P Castle; Aaron D Martin; Premal J Desai; Costas D Lallas; Robert G Ferrigni; Paul E Andrews Journal: J Endourol Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: A Laird; K C C Choy; H Delaney; M L Cutress; K M O'Connor; D A Tolley; S A McNeill; G D Stewart; A C P Riddick Journal: World J Urol Date: 2014-03-20 Impact factor: 4.226