Comparison of hand assisted versus standard laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for suspected renal cell carcinoma

PURPOSE: We compared standard and hand assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for suspected renal cell carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 22 hand assisted and 16 standard laparoscopic radical nephrectomies performed for suspected renal cell carcinoma. Operative and recovery data were collected prospectively and from medical records as part of an institutional review board approved protocol. Patients completed pain, activity and the 12-item short form health related quality of life surveys preoperatively and postoperatively. RESULTS: Although patients undergoing hand assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy had larger tumors (mean 6.3 versus 4.1 cm., p = 0.009), tended toward greater corrected mean specimen weight (658 versus 482 gm., p = 0.111) and had greater medical co-morbidity (p = 0.0228), mean operative time for hand assisted laparoscopic procedures was significantly shorter (205 versus 270 minutes, p = 0.0004). With experience mean operative time decreased for standard but not for hand assisted laparoscopy (293 to 232 minutes, p = 0.0445, versus 206 to 204, p = 0.6162). Procedure type, surgeon experience and adrenal sparing were the only significant predictors of operative time. There was no difference in the groups in terms of the complication rate, hospital cost or stay, return to activity or overall pain score, or in the difference in preoperative and postoperative 12-item short form scores. Hand assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy tended to be associated with more abdominal pain early in convalescence and more wound complications but not significantly so. CONCLUSIONS: Hand assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy offers recovery, morbidity and cost that are comparable to those of standard laparoscopy. The benefits of the technique include shorter operative times, no need for specimen morcellation and direct manual control of the operative field. It is particularly useful early in surgeon experience, for large specimens or when patient co-morbidities require a rapid procedure.     

Open donor, laparoscopic donor and hand assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a comparison of outcomes

PURPOSE: In experienced hands laparoscopic surgery has been shown to be safe for procuring kidneys for transplantation that function identically to open nephrectomy controls. While searching for a safer and easier approach to laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, hand assisted laparoscopic techniques have been added to the surgical armamentarium. We compare allograft function in patients with greater than 1-year followup who underwent open donor (historic series), classic laparoscopic and hand assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The charts of 48 patients who underwent open donor, laparoscopic donor or hand assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy were reviewed. Only patients with greater than 1-year followup and complete charts were included in our study. Of these patients 34 underwent consecutive laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy and 14 underwent open donor nephrectomy. Mean patient age plus or minus standard deviation (SD) was 36.5 +/- 8.4 years for donors and 29 +/- 17 for recipients at transplantation (range 13 months to 69 years). In the laparoscopic group 11 patients underwent the transperitoneal technique, and 23 underwent hand assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy. RESULTS: Total operating time was significantly reduced with the hand assisted laparoscopic technique compared with classic laparoscopy, as was the time from skin incision to kidney removal and warm ischemic time. Average warm ischemic time plus or minus SD was 3.9 +/- 0.3 minutes for laparoscopic nephrectomy and 1.6 +/- 0.2 for hand assisted laparoscopy (p <0.05). Long-term followup of serum creatinine levels revealed no significant differences among the 3 groups. Comparison of those levels for recipients of open nephrectomy versus laparoscopic and hand assisted laparoscopic techniques revealed p values greater than 0.5. No blood transfusions were necessary. Complications included adrenal vein injury in 1 patient, small bowel obstruction in 2, abdominal hernia at the trocar site in 1 and deep venous thrombosis in 1. CONCLUSIONS: Classic laparoscopic donor and hand assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomies appear to be safe procedures for harvesting kidneys. The recipient graft function is similar in the laparoscopic and open surgery groups.     

Laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy: a 9-year experience

PURPOSE: The laparoscopic approach for renal cell carcinoma is slowly evolving. We report our experience with laparoscopic radical nephrectomy and compare it to a contemporary cohort of patients with renal cell carcinoma who underwent open radical nephrectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1990 to 1999, 32 males and 28 females underwent 61 laparoscopic radical nephrectomies for suspicious renal cell carcinoma. Clinical data from a computerized database were reviewed and compared to a contemporary group of 33 patients who underwent open radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. RESULTS: Patients in the laparoscopic radical nephrectomy group had significantly reduced, estimated blood loss (172 versus 451 ml., p <0.001), hospital stay (3.4 versus 5.2 days, p <0.001), pain medication requirement (28.0 versus 78.3 mg., p <0.001) and quicker return to normal activity than patients in the open radical nephrectomy group (3.6 versus 8.1 weeks, p <0.001). The majority of laparoscopic specimens (65%) were morcellated. Operating time and cost were higher in the laparoscopic than the open nephrectomy group. Average followup was 25 months (range 3 to 73) for the laparoscopic and 27.5 months (range 7 to 90) for the open group. Renal cell carcinoma in 3 patients (8%) recurred in the laparoscopic group versus renal cell carcinoma in 3 (9%) in the open group. When stratified patients with tumors larger than 4 to 10 cm. experienced similar benefits and results as patients with tumors less than or equal to 4 cm. To date there have been no instances of trocar or intraperitoneal seeding in the laparoscopic radical nephrectomy group. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy, although technically demanding, is a viable alternative for managing localized renal tumors up to 10 cm. It affords patients with renal tumors an improved postoperative course with less pain and a quicker recovery while providing similar efficacy at 2-year followup for patients with T1 and T2 tumors.     

Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma--transperitoneal anterior approach

PURPOSE: To evaluate the usefulness of transperitoneal anterior approach in laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for patients with renal cell carcinoma. MATERIAL: Ten patients (Eight males and two females) with small renal cell carcinoma less than 7 cm in diameter were treated with laparoscopic radical nephrectomy between June 1997 and May 1999. Clinical stage was T1aN0M0 in 6 cases and T1bN0M0 in 4 cases. METHOD: Of the 10 patients, the initial four received preoperative embolization of the renal artery. Under general anesthesia laparoscopic radical nephrectomy via transperitoneal anterior approach was performed in all patients. This procedure facilitates initiated early access to the renal vessels as does open radical nephrectomy. The kidney was dissected en bloc with Gerota's fascia and delivered from the small skin incision without morcellation. RESULT: Two patients needed conversion to open surgery. The mean operating time of eight patients except for conversion cases was 247 minutes and the mean blood loss was 258 ml. There was no major complication associated with laparoscopic procedure. CONCLUSION: Transperitoneal anterior approach in laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is a suitable and useful procedure for the treatment of small renal cell carcinoma because it enables us to avoid possible tumor manipulation by early access to the renal vessels as open radical nephrectomy.     

Hand assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: comparison with open radical nephrectomy

PURPOSE: We compared the results of hand assisted laparoscopic and conventional open radical nephrectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinical data on 54 hand assisted and 50 open radical nephrectomies performed at our hospital from September 1999 to October 2002 were reviewed. RESULTS: Mean operative time in the laparoscopic and open groups was similar (194.9 and 180.7 minutes, respectively, p = 0.087). However, estimated mean blood loss (182.8 vs 262.8 ml, p <0.001), mean days to oral intake (2.6 vs 3.7 days, p <0.001) mean duration of an indwelling drain (2.6 vs 3.2 days, p <0.001) and mean hospital stay (6.8 vs 8.9 days, p <0.001) were significantly less in the laparoscopic group. In the laparoscopic group no conversions or re-explorations were required and no major complications occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that hand assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy represents an effective, minimally invasive treatment option in patients with suspected renal cell carcinoma.     

Expanding the indications for laparoscopic radical nephrectomy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is an established treatment for patients with clinical T1 renal cell carcinoma who are unsuitable for nephron-sparing surgery. In this review we summarize the expanding indications for laparoscopic nephrectomy, including large tumors, locally advanced disease, venous thrombi and cytoreductive surgery. RECENT FINDINGS: Laparoscopic nephrectomy remains the foremost conventional laparoscopic procedure in urologic surgery. Multiple studies have demonstrated the feasibility of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for stage T2 tumors, showing less morbidity and earlier return to activity compared to the open approach. Confirmation of durable oncologic control requires randomized prospective trials with longer follow-up. With growing experience, laparoscopic surgery has been extended to patients with renal cell carcinoma associated with limited local invasion and lymph node metastases. Experimental studies demonstrate the technical feasibility of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy in the presence of renal vein and inferior vena cava thrombi. In well-selected patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma, laparoscopic cytoreductive nephrectomy can be performed safely, with less morbidity than open nephrectomy. SUMMARY: Minimally invasive surgery results in significantly less postoperative morbidity than does open surgery. The intermediate oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for advanced renal cell carcinoma are comparable to those historically achieved with open radical nephrectomy. Longer follow-up is needed to confirm survival equivalence.     

Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy for Renal Tumor: The Washington University Experience

Purpose

We report our experience with laparoscopic radical nephrectomy in 17 consecutive patients with renal tumors.

Materials and Methods

The clinical data on 17 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic radical nephrectomy were reviewed. Of the patients 12 with stage pT1 or pT2 renal cell carcinoma 7 cm. in diameter or smaller undergoing laparoscopic radical nephrectomy were compared to 12 undergoing open radical nephrectomy for stage pT1 or pT2 renal cell carcinoma 6 cm. in diameter or smaller.

Results

Among the 17 patients undergoing laparoscopic radical nephrectomy average operative time was 6.9 hours (range 4.5 to 9) and average estimated blood loss was 105 cc (range 50 to 600). Average weight of the surgical specimen was 402 gm. (range 190 to 1,100). In 12 of 16 patients in whom laparoscopic radical nephrectomy was completed the specimen was removed intact. The patients required an average of 24 mg. morphine sulfate equivalent (range 2 to 220) for postoperative pain. Average hospital stay was 4.5 days (range 3 to 11) and average interval to resume normal activities was 3.5 weeks (range 2 to 4).The 12 patients in the open and laparoscopic radical nephrectomy groups were similar with respect to age, American Society of Anesthesiologists score and interval of surgery. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy required significantly more operative time than open radical nephrectomy (6.9 versus 2.2 hours, respectively). However, the laparoscopic radical nephrectomy group compared to the open radical nephrectomy group had significantly less postoperative pain (24 versus 40 mg. morphine sulfate equivalent required for postoperative analgesia), shorter interval to resuming oral intake (1 versus 3 days), more rapid discharge from the hospital (4.5 versus 8.4 days) and more rapid return to normal activities (3.5 versus 5.1 weeks). The laparoscopic nephrectomy group also fully recovered more rapidly than the open surgical group (5.8 versus 39 weeks). To date, during a 4-year period there was no retroperitoneal recurrence or seeding of a port site.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is a lengthy and demanding procedure. However, it affords patients with renal cell carcinoma a markedly improved postoperative course while accomplishing the necessary surgical goals.     

Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for cancer

Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is a rapidly emerging technique for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma. Surgeons at multiple institutions have reported excellent technical results with this procedure, with encouraging safety and efficacy data and low complication rates comparable with the rates in open radical nephrectomy. Although debate continues regarding the pros and cons of the transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal approach and regarding morcellation versus intact specimen extraction, laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is beginning to approach standard-of-care status at select institutions for tumors less than 8 cm in size. Although generally accepted indications for laparoscopic radical nephrectomy include T1-T2N0M0 tumors, increasing experience and operator confidence have allowed expansion of these indications to include select patients with nodal disease, preoperatively staged level I renal vein thrombus, cytoreductive surgery before immunotherapy protocols, and the rare patient with a laterally directed locally invasive (pT4N0M0) renal cell carcinoma.     

Retroperitoneoscopic partial nephrectomy by using microwave tissue coagulation

Partial nephrectomy is widely accepted as a treatment for small renal cell carcinoma. However, the laparoscopic approach has not yet been considered as a standard procedure. We reviewed our 13 retroperitoneoscopic partial nephrectomies and 11 conventional open partial nephrectomies. We have used microwave tissue coagulation for retroperitoneoscopic surgery without renal pedicle clamping between December 1999 and May 2003. The mean operating time for the retroperitoneoscopic group was not significantly longer than that for conventional open surgery group (183 minutes vs 194 minutes). However, the mean blood loss for the retroperitoneoscopic group was less than that for the open group (143 ml vs 512 ml). Histologic evaluation revealed renal cell carcinoma in 10 patients, angiomyolipoma in 2 patients, and lymphoangiomyomatosis in one patient for retroperitoneoscopic group and renal cell carcinoma in 11 patients for the conventional open surgery group. In addition, when compared with the historical control that had undergone conventional partial nephrectomy, laparoscopic cases had significantly shorter postoperative times to oral intake, ambulance, and discharge from hospital. Bowel injury, massive bleeding, urine leakage, and atelectasis occurred in one case each in retroperitoneoscopic surgery. Retroperitoneoscopic surgery in the case of massive bleeding was converted to open surgery. On the other hand, urine leakage and postoperative hemorrhage occurred in one case each in conventional open surgery. Retroperitoneoscopic partial nephrectomy by using microwave tissue coagulation is a useful and less invasive method, whereas this procedure is more challenging than open partial nephrectomy in terms of complications.     

Radical nephrectomy and nephroureterectomy in the octogenarian and nonagenarian: comparison of laparoscopic and open approaches

Objectives. To retrospectively compare the outcome of laparoscopic and open radical nephrectomy or nephroureterectomy in patients 80 years old or older, inasmuch as the tolerance profile of major laparoscopic renal surgery in comparison to open surgery in the elderly patient has not been previously reported.Methods. Since September 1997, 11 patients 80 years old or older underwent retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy or nephroureterectomy for cancer. These patients were compared with 6 consecutive patients 80 years old or older who underwent comparable open surgery at our institution since January 1994. No tumor had computed tomographic evidence of lymphatic, vascular, or perirenal extension.Results. Baseline parameters were comparable between the laparoscopic and open groups. The laparoscopic group had a similar median surgical time (210 minutes versus 175 minutes; P = 0.1) and blood loss (150 mL versus 125 mL; P = 0.8) compared with the open group. However, specimen weight was larger in the laparoscopic group (568 g versus 292 g; P = 0.04). Moreover, the laparoscopic group had a quicker resumption of oral intake (less than 1 day versus 4 days; P <0.001), decreased narcotic requirements (14 mg versus 326 mg; P = 0.004), shorter hospital stay (2 days versus 6 days; P <0.001), and faster convalescence (14 days versus 42 days; P <0.001) compared with the open group.Conclusions. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy and nephroureterectomy are well tolerated by the elderly patient. Although our sample size was small, it appears that laparoscopy is an excellent alternative to open surgery for excision of selected renal malignancies in the octogenarian and nonagenarian population.     

Prospective, case matched comparison of hand assisted laparoscopic and open surgical live donor nephrectomy

PURPOSE: The technical difficulty of standard laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy has limited its application. Hand assistance, which takes advantage of the incision necessary for organ removal, facilitates laparoscopy without significant impact on patient recovery. We prospectively compared open surgical and hand assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our first 10 laparoscopic live donor nephrectomies were matched with 40 open donor nephrectomies by gender, age and body mass index. Data were obtained by pain scales, SF-12 survey instruments, questionnaires and chart abstraction. RESULTS: Operative time was longer for the laparoscopic approach (mean 95 versus 215 minutes). However, laparoscopic group patients had a shorter hospital stay compared to those undergoing open surgery (mean 2.9 versus 1.8 days), returned sooner to nonstrenuous activity (mean 19.0 versus 9.9 days) and reported less pain 6 weeks postoperatively (mean 2.3 versus 0.6) (p 相似文献   

Prospective randomized comparison of transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy

PURPOSE: We report on a prospective randomized comparison of transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal tumor. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between June 1999 and June 2001, 102 consecutive eligible patients with a computerized tomography identified renal tumor were prospectively randomized to undergo either a transperitoneal (group 1, 50 patients) or retroperitoneal (group 2, 52 patients) laparoscopic radical nephrectomy with intact specimen extraction. Exclusion criteria for the study included body mass index greater than 35 or a history of prior major abdominal surgery in the quadrant of interest. Both groups were matched regarding age (63 versus 65 years, p = 0.69), BMI (29 versus 28, p = 0.89), American Society of Anesthesiologists class (2.7 versus 2.8, p = 0.37), laterality (right side 46% versus 48%, p = 0.85) and mean tumor size (5.3 versus 5.0 cm, p = 0.73). RESULTS: All 102 procedures were technically successful without the need for open conversion. Compared to the transperitoneal approach, the retroperitoneal approach was associated with a shorter time to renal artery control (91 versus 34 minutes, p <0.0001), shorter time to renal vein control (98 versus 45 minutes, p <0.0001) and shorter total operative time (207 versus 150 minutes, p = 0.001). However, the transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches were similar in terms of estimated blood loss (180 versus 242 cc, p = 0.13), hospital stay (43 versus 45 hours, p = 0.55), intraoperative complications (10% versus 7.7%, p = 0.30), postoperative complications (20% versus 13.5%, p = 0.14) and postoperative analgesia requirements (27 versus 26 mg MSO4 equivalent p = 0.13). Pathology revealed renal cell carcinoma in 84% and 75% of cases, respectively, with no positive surgical margin in any case. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy can be performed efficiently and effectively with the transperitoneal or the retroperitoneal approach. While renal hilar control and total operative time may be quicker with retroperitoneoscopy, the approaches are similar in terms of other patient outcomes evaluated.     

Limitations of laparoscopy for bilateral nephrectomy for autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease

PURPOSE: We retrospectively studied outcomes following bilateral hand assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the charts of 18 patients with symptomatic autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease who underwent bilateral hand assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy. Preoperative radiographic imaging was reviewed retrospectively to determine kidney size based on an ellipsoid shape. A visual analog pain scale with scores of 0 to 10 to assess pain related to autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease was measured preoperatively and postoperatively. RESULTS: Average patient age was 48.2 years (range 30 to 64). Of the patients 14 successfully underwent bilateral hand assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy, while 4 required open conversion. A total of 16 patients underwent nephrectomy for pain and 2 underwent surgery for frequent recurrent symptomatic urinary tract infections. All patients except 1 underwent renal transplantation before bilateral nephrectomy. There was a significant difference in the volume of the right and left kidneys between the hand assisted laparoscopic and open groups (mean +/- SD 1,043 +/- 672 and 1,058 +/- 603.8 vs 4,052 +/- 548 and 3,592 +/- 1,752 cm(3), p <0.001 and 0.06 respectively). There were 5 complications, including wound infection and protracted ileus in 2 patients each, and incisional hernia in 1. In addition, the difference in mean preoperative and postoperative visual analog pain scores was statistically significant (6.9, range 3 to 10 and 0.5, range 0 to 2, p <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral laparoscopic hand assisted nephrectomy is a safe and reliable option in patients requiring removal of the 2 kidneys in a single setting. Rather than performing staged nephrectomies, hand assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy allows the single administration of general anesthesia and provides effective relief of bothersome symptoms in patients with symptomatic autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease. This procedure is safe in patients with renal transplants. Patients with massive polycystic kidneys with a kidney volume of greater than 3,500 cc are at increased risk for open conversion and they may have improved outcomes if open nephrectomy is attempted from the outset.     

RETROPERITONEAL LAPAROSCOPIC VERSUS OPEN RADICAL NEPHRECTOMY

PURPOSE: We analyze the retroperitoneal approach to laparoscopic radical nephrectomy in regard to feasibility, safety, morbidity and cancer control, and compare results and outcomes in patients who underwent retroperitoneal laparoscopic or open radical nephrectomy from 1995 to 1998. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The records of 58 consecutive patients with renal cancer who underwent radical nephrectomy from 1995 through 1998 were reviewed. Of the patients 29 underwent open radical nephrectomy (group 1) and 29 underwent retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (group 2). Various parameters were compared and statistical analyses were performed. RESULTS: The 2 groups were similar in regard to age, gender and side of the tumor. Operative time was slightly shorter in group 1 (mean 121.4 versus 145 minutes in group 2, p = 0.047). Mean tumor size plus or minus standard deviation was larger in group 1 (5.71 +/- 2.01 versus 4.02 +/- 1.87 cm. in group 2). Group 2 patients had significantly less operative blood loss (mean 100.0 versus 284.5 ml. in group 1, p < 0.005) and used significantly less parenteral pain medication (p < 0.05). Postoperative hospital stay was significantly longer in group 1 (9.7 +/- 3.6 versus 4.8 +/- 2.0 days in group 2, p < 0.001), and the complication rate was higher (24 versus 8%, respectively). One group 1 patient died of renal cancer (pT2G2) after 14 months and local recurrence with hepatic metastasis occurred after 9 months in a group 2 patient with a pT3G2 tumor. CONCLUSIONS: Retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy for kidney cancer requires further assessment. It seems to have several advantages over open radical nephrectomy, and to be effective and safe for less than 50 cm. renal tumors but a risk of spillage cannot be ruled out for larger tumors.     

腹腔镜治疗大体积肾癌的临床经验及与开放手术的比较

目的探讨腹腔镜治疗大体积（直径〉7cm）肾癌的临床应用价值,并与开放手术的疗效进行比较。方法回顾性分析2001年10月至2012年6月于北京大学第一医院接受肾根治性手术治疗、术后病理诊断为肾癌且肿瘤最大直径〉7cm患者的临床资料。统计患者各项围手术期信息,进行腹腔镜手术和开放手术的对比。结果共388例患者入组,其中腹腔镜手术71例,开放手术317例。腹腔镜手术组包括23例经腹腔入路和48例经腹膜后入路,较开放组患者相比,腹腔镜组术中出血量少（358．73mL vs．462．02mL,P=0．002）,术后住院日短（6．59d vs．8．87d,P=0．000）,但手术时间偏长（197．60min vs．173．07min,P=0．003）,肿瘤体积较小（8．82cm vs．9．50cm,P=0．018）。结论采用腹腔镜手术治疗大体积肾癌安全可行,具有创伤小、恢复快的优势。对于有一定腹腔镜手术基础的医师,在合理把握适应证、选择合适手术入路的基础上,可以开展腹腔镜手术治疗大体积肾癌。但尚需进一步研究来了解其远期肿瘤控制结果。     

LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL NEPHRECTOMY: CANCER CONTROL FOR RENAL CELL CARCINOMA

PURPOSE: We evaluated the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy in patients with clinically localized renal cell carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 1991 and 1999, 67 laparoscopic radical nephrectomies were performed for clinically localized, stages cT1/2 NXMX, pathologically confirmed renal cell carcinoma. During this period 54 patients who underwent open radical nephrectomy with pathologically confirmed stages pT1/2 NXMX disease were also identified. Medical and operative records were retrospectively reviewed and telephone followup was done to assess patient status. RESULTS: In the laparoscopic and open groups average tumor size was 5.1 (range 1 to 13) and 5.4 cm. (range 0.2 to 18), respectively, which was not statistically significant. No patient had laparoscopic port site, wound or renal fossa tumor recurrence in either group. All patients were followed at least 12 months. In the laparoscopic group 2 cancer specific deaths occurred at a mean followup of 35.6 months. In the open group there were 2 cancer specific deaths and 3 cases of disease progression at a mean followup of 44 months. Kaplan-Meier disease-free survival and actuarial survival analysis revealed no significant differences in the laparoscopic and open radical nephrectomy groups. Also, no differences were noted in the complication rate. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is an effective alternative for localized renal cell carcinoma when the principles of surgical oncology are maintained. Initial data show shorter patient hospitalization and effective cancer control with no significant difference in survival compared with open radical nephrectomy.     

Long-term followup after laparoscopic radical nephrectomy

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy has been shown to be less morbid than traditional open radical nephrectomy. The long-term oncological effectiveness of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy remains to be established. MATERIALS AND METHODS: At 3 centers patients undergoing laparoscopic radical nephrectomy before November 1, 1996 with pathologically confirmed renal cell carcinoma were identified. A representative group of patients undergoing open radical nephrectomy for clinical T1, T2 lesions was also identified. Staging, operative details and postoperative course were reviewed. Followup consisted of review of clinical, laboratory and radiological records. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed. RESULTS: The study included 64 patients treated with laparoscopic and 69 treated with open radical nephrectomy with respective average ages of 60.6 and 61.3 years at surgery. On preoperative imaging open lesions were larger (6.2 cm., range 2.5 to 15) than laparoscopic radical nephrectomy lesions (4.3 cm., range 2 to 10, p <0.001). Pathology reports revealed no difference in specimen weight (425 and 495 gm., p = 0.146) or average Fuhrman grade (1.88 and 1.78, p = 0.476) between laparoscopic and open radical nephrectomy, respectively. Median followup was 54 months (range 0 to 94) for laparoscopic and 69 months (range 8 to 114) for open radical nephrectomy. Kaplan-Meier analysis with log rank comparison revealed 5-year recurrence-free survival of 92% and 91% for laparoscopic and open radical nephrectomy, respectively (p = 0.583). At 5 years cancer specific survival was 98% and 92% (p = 0.124), and nonspecific survival was 81% and 89% (p = 0.260) for laparoscopic and open radical nephrectomy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy confers long-term oncological effectiveness equivalent to traditional open radical nephrectomy.     

100-minute retroperitoneoscopic radical nephrectomy: a new retroperitoneal approach with a hand assisted method

PURPOSE: A new approach for retroperitoneoscopic radical nephrectomy is introduced. The point of our surgical method is the application of a combination of hand assistance and pure laparoscopic procedures with appropriate surgical steps via the retroperitoneal approach. In our early series we had good surgical results and we completed radical nephrectomy in about 100 minutes using this procedure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 20 consecutive patients with renal cell carcinoma (cT1-2) who were operated on with this surgical method were analyzed. Surgical procedures occurred in 5 steps. In step 1 the retroperitoneal space was created manually from a pararectal incision at the umbilicus level. In step 2 the lateroconal fascia was incised and the renal hilar area was exposed with hand assistance. In step 3 hilar dissection was performed by pure laparoscopic procedure with another surgical instrument inserted from the hand device. Step 4 involved the application of hand assistance again for the quick mobilization of the kidney and adrenal gland. In step 5 the intact surgical specimen was retrieved from the hand device. RESULTS: Mean operative time and estimated blood loss were 103 +/- 21 minutes (range 70 to 145) and 49 +/- 85 ml (range 5 to 360), respectively. Mean days to oral intake and ambulation were 1.0 and 1.1, respectively. Operative times of the steps of hilar dissection and mobilization of the kidney and adrenal were shorter than in other series performed by standard retroperitoneoscopic radical nephrectomy. Major complications were not experienced. At this point, no metastasis has been experienced. CONCLUSIONS: Our surgical method may have the benefits of the retroperitoneal approach and hand assistance. The retroperitoneoscopic hand assisted method may be another important option in the 3 major approaches for laparoscopic radical nephrectomy, although longer-term followup is clearly required.     

Comparison of laparoscopic versus open nephrectomy in the pediatric population

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic renal surgery has become an accepted approach for benign disease in adults. We compare our experience with laparoscopic and open nephrectomy in a pediatric population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 10 pediatric patients underwent laparoscopic nephrectomy or nephroureterectomy and an additional 10 consecutive children underwent similar open procedures. All patients had benign disease and were treated at a single institution. Medical records were reviewed retrospectively for relevant clinical data. RESULTS: Planned surgery was completed in all cases. There were no conversions to open surgery in the laparoscopic group. Mean operative time was 175.6 versus 120.2 minutes (p = 0.01) and mean hospital stay was 22.5 versus 41.3 hours (p = 0.03) in the laparoscopic and open nephrectomy groups, respectively. Blood loss was not statistically different. Analgesic use was qualitatively less in the laparoscopic nephrectomy group. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic nephrectomy and nephroureterectomy may be performed safely in children. While operative time was somewhat longer in our initial laparoscopic series, postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter than for open surgery. Further experience with this technique is warranted.     

Financial analysis of open versus laparoscopic radical nephrectomy and nephroureterectomy

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy and nephroureterectomy are rapidly becoming established procedures in select patients with renal cell carcinoma and upper tract transitional cell carcinoma, respectively. We present a retrospective comparative analysis of laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy and nephroureterectomy from a financial standpoint. The effect of the learning curve on costs incurred was also evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Detailed itemized cost data on 18 contemporary cases of open radical nephrectomy performed from September 1997 to July 1998 were compared with similar data on 20 initial laparoscopic cases performed from September 1997 to July 1998 and 15 more recent laparoscopic radical nephrectomy cases performed from August 1998 to July 1999. Financial data were also compared on 14 contemporary patients each who underwent open radical nephroureterectomy from June 1997 to December 1999, initial laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy from June 1997 to December 1998 and more recent laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy from January 1999 to October 2000. Yearly financial costs were adjusted for inflation by a 4% annual rate to reflect year 2000 data. RESULTS: For radical nephrectomy mean operative time in the 18 open, 20 initial laparoscopic and 15 recent laparoscopic cases was 185.3, 205.7 and 147.3 minutes, respectively. Mean specimen weight was 555, 616 and 558 gm., and mean hospital stay was 132, 31 and 23 hours, respectively. Compared with open radical nephrectomy mean total costs associated with initial laparoscopy were 33% greater (p = 0.0003). Mean intraoperative costs were 102% greater and mean postoperative costs were 50% less. In contrast, the more recent laparoscopic cases were an overall mean of 12% less expensive than open surgery (p = 0.05). Mean intraoperative costs were only 33% greater and mean postoperative costs were 68% less. For radical nephroureterectomy mean operative time in the 14 open, 14 initial laparoscopic and 14 recent laparoscopic cases was 246, 196 and 195 minutes, respectively. Mean specimen weight was 442, 517 and 531 gm., and mean hospital stay was 142, 63 and 32 hours, respectively. Compared with open radical nephroureterectomy mean total costs associated with initial laparoscopic cases were 28% greater (p = 0.03). Mean intraoperative costs were 65% greater and mean postoperative costs were 27% less. In contrast, the more recent laparoscopic cases were an overall mean of 6% less expensive than open surgery (p = 0.63). Mean intraoperative costs were only 31% greater and mean postoperative costs were 62% less. CONCLUSIONS: Initially in the learning curve laparoscopic radical nephrectomy and nephroureterectomy were 33% and 28% financially more expensive, respectively, than their open counterparts. However, with increased operator experience and efficiency resulting in more rapid operative time and decreased hospitalization laparoscopic radical nephrectomy and nephroureterectomy are currently 12% and 6% less expensive, respectively, than their open counterparts at our institution.