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.     

Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: a single-center experience of 51 cases

A modified technique of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for treatment of renal cell carcinoma makes surgery easier, faster, and safer in terms of tumor cell spillage. We report our experience with this procedure in 51 consecutive cases. A transperitoneal approach was used in all cases. The average patient age was 62 years. The solid renal mass diameter was between 2 and 9 cm. Extrafascial mobilization of the kidney included limited lymph node dissection. In six patients the adrenal gland was removed simultaneously. The specimen was removed intact through a small muscle-splitting incision in the lower abdominal wall. The procedure was successful without conversion to open surgery in all 51 patients. The average operating time was 125 minutes, and the average postoperative hospital stay was 7.2 days. Major complications were seen in 4% of patients. Neither local recurrences nor metastases were observed in the following 7.9 (1-19) months. In our experience, laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is safe and efficient. Removing the specimen intact through a small muscle-splitting incision reduces operating time, avoids tumor cell spillage, and allows exact pathological staging.     

Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy

Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy has gained in popularity as an accepted treatment modality for localized renal cell carcinoma at many centers worldwide. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy may be performed via a transperitoneal or retroperitoneal approach. Mostly, the transperitoneal approach is used. Current indications for laparoscopic radical nephrectomy include patients with T(1)-T(3a)N(0)M(0) renal tumors. Herein, transperitoneal as well as retroperitoneal laparoscopic approaches are described. Surgical outcomes and complications from published series are reviewed with comparison to open surgery. Special related concerns as oncologic principles, organ retrieval, lymphadenectomy, and concomitant adrenalectomy are addressed. In conclusion, laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is now established with considerable advantages; decreased postoperative morbidity, decreased analgesic requirements, improved cosmesis, shorter hospital stay and convalescence. Although no long-term follow-up is available, short and intermediate follow-up results confirm the effectiveness of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy.     

经腹腹腔镜肾癌根治术(附70例报告)

目的探讨经腹途径腹腔镜肾癌根治切除术的技术要点及临床价值。方法采用经腹途径腹腔镜肾癌根治术,切开侧腹膜后,首先处理肾蒂血管,然后行肾癌根治术。结果70例手术全部成功,无中转开放手术,手术时间90～230min,平均130min。术中及术后均未输血。2例切口感染,4例皮下气肿。术后住院4～8d,平均6.2d。70例随访2～78个月,平均47个月,无肿瘤复发。结论经腹途径腹腔镜肾癌根治术具有创伤小,安全有效,恢复快等优点,具有良好的临床应用前景。     

The experience of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal tumors

We evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal tumors. Between September 1993 and October 2001, 18 patients with renal tumors underwent laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. The mean patient age was 57.1 years ranging from 36 to 78. Clinical stage was T1N0 in all patients. The mean tumor diameter was 4.0 cm ranging from 1.8 to 7.0. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy was performed by using the transperitoneal anterior approach on 11 patients and retroperitoneal approach on 7 patients. The specimen was removed through an extended stab wound after blunt segmentation of renal parenchyma in a specimen bag (LapSac). The mean operative time was 405 (270-550) and 453 (325-635) min for the transperitoneal approach and retroperitoneal approach respectively, and the mean blood loss was 281 (52-700) and 223 (10-850) ml, respectively. There was an intraoperative complication of minor splenic injury in 2 patients receiving the transperitoneal approach, which was conservatively managed. Histopathology revealed renal cell carcinoma in 17 patients and renal oncocytoma in one patient. There was no recurrence with a mean follow-up of 28.9 months. Compared with 13 patients who underwent open radical nephrectomy during the same period, laparoscopic nephrectomy has a longer operative time (424 versus 214 min, p < 0.001), equal blood loss (259 versus 210 ml, p = 0.59), quicker resumption of ambulation (1.8 versus 2.5 days, p = 0.016) and food intake (1.4 versus 2.2 days, p = 0.003), shorter postoperative hospital stay (10.9 versus 18 days, p = 0.0016), and a tendency of less frequent analgesic requirements (1.9 versus 4.7 times, p = 0.09). Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is a safe and useful surgery for renal tumors providing minimal invasiveness.     

Laparoscopic nephrectomy: prediction of outcome in relation to the preoperative risk factors in two approaches

PURPOSE: The data on laparoscopic nephrectomy in Mansoura Urology & Nephrology Center were reviewed to identify the preoperative findings that may predict the need for conversion to open surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred sixty-three patients were subjected to transperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy, while 82 underwent retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy for benign renal diseases. The preoperative demographic data and laboratory and radiologic findings of these patients were correlated with failure rate of the laparoscopic procedure. RESULTS: The overall failure rate was 10.4% and 11% for the transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approach, respectively. Positive urine culture, renographic clearance of the removed kidney (>10 ml/min), and learning curve were independently associated with a greater risk of failure in patients undergoing transperitoneal nephrectomy. For the retroperitoneal approach, a positive urine culture, renographic clearance (> or =10 ml/min), and large kidney showed statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Preoperative data could be used as a predictor of laparoscopic nephrectomy outcome in patients with benign renal diseases. A more experienced surgeon should be selected for risky cases, bearing in mind the greater potential for early conversion to open surgery.     

Hand assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal carcinoma using a new abdominal wall sealing device

PURPOSE: We report our initial experience with a hand assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for patients with renal carcinoma, and compare our results to those of conventional open radical nephrectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The clinical data on 6 consecutive patients who underwent hand assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for stage T1N0M0 renal cell carcinoma were reviewed. We performed hand assisted laparoscopic surgery using the new LAP DISC* abdominal wall sealing device. We compared the results of this procedure with those of conventional open radical nephrectomy in 12 patients with stage T1N0M0 renal cell carcinoma. RESULTS: The hand assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal carcinoma was successfully performed without any major or minor complications in all 6 patients. Mean operation time for the laparoscopic group was significantly longer than that for the open surgery group (303 minutes versus 224 minutes, p = 0.0042). However, no significant difference was observed in mean estimated blood loss for the 2 groups (264 ml. in the laparoscopic group versus 341 ml. in the open surgery group). The frequency of parenteral analgesia postoperatively in the laparoscopic group was significantly lower than that in the open surgery group (16.7% versus 75.0%, p = 0.043). In addition, the laparoscopic group seemed to recover more rapidly than the open surgery group. The abdominal wall sealing device was easy to attach to the abdominal wall, and allowed rapid hand removal and reinsertion. CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary results indicate that a hand assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy with the abdominal wall sealing device is an effective and safe surgical procedure, and is less invasive than open radical nephrectomy.     

性腺血管为标记经腹腹腔镜程序化处理肾蒂的技巧

目的探讨以性腺血管为标记的经腹腹腔镜处理肾蒂的手术操作技巧。 方法2014年5月至2018年7月,中山大学第三附属医院岭南医院由同一术者进行经腹入路腹腔镜肾切除手术72例,其中单纯肾切除术42例(感染性无功能肾28例、肾结核10例、单纯无功能肾4例),肾癌根治术22例,肾输尿管全长切除术8例。采用以性腺血管为标记的方法,解剖显露肾蒂,用Hem－o－lok处理肾蒂。 结果72例手术顺利完成,均能完好显露性腺血管并以性腺血管为标记寻找肾蒂。手术时间(148±68)min,出血量(80±57)ml,无中转开放手术,无周围脏器损伤。 结论以性腺血管为解剖标记程序化显露肾蒂血管,增加腹腔镜肾手术的手术安全性,缩短手术时间。     

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.     

腹腔镜经腹入路泌尿系手术的并发症及预防处理

目的：分析腹腔镜经腹入路泌尿系手术并发症的原因及预防和处理方法。方法：回顾分析1156例腹腔镜经腹入路泌尿系手术的资料，总结出现的并发症和处理方法。结果：1156例手术出现严重并发症22例，其中皮下气肿6例；肾上腺手术过程中肾静脉损伤转开放1例，肾上腺中央静脉损伤2例；肾囊肿去顶减压周围肾实质出血2例；根治性肾切出血转开放3例；1例肾切除术后出血再次急诊开放手术发现肾蒂周围一分支小动脉出血。膈肌损伤腔镜下修补2例；胰腺损伤转开放1例；脾脏损伤出血再手术开放脾切除1例；结肠损伤1例；术后肺动脉栓塞2例。本组手术的并发症发生率为1．9％（22／1156），转开放率0．43％（5／1156），再手术率0．35％（4／1156），无死亡病例。22例患者积极正确处理后均痊愈出院。结论：充分认识腹腔镜经腹入路泌尿系手术的常见并发症，提高手术操作技巧，正确预防和处理并发症，可以避免严重后果的发生。     

Retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: the Cleveland clinic experience

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is usually performed by the transperitoneal approach. At our institution the retroperitoneoscopic approach is preferred. We confirm the technical feasibility of retroperitoneoscopic radical nephrectomy, even for large specimens, and compare its results with open surgery in a contemporary cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 47 patients underwent 53 retroperitoneoscopic radical nephrectomies. Data from the most recent 34 laparoscopic cases were retrospectively compared with 34 contemporary cases treated with open radical nephrectomy. RESULTS: For the 53 retroperitoneoscopic radical nephrectomies mean tumor size was 4.6 cm. (range 2 to 12), surgical time was 2.9 hours (range 1.2 to 4.5) and blood loss was 128 cc. Mean specimen weight was 484 gm. (range 52 to 1,328), and concomitant adrenalectomy was performed in 72% of patients. Mean analgesic requirement was 31 mg. morphine sulfate equivalent. Average hospital stay was 1.6 days, with 68% of patients discharged from the hospital within 23 hours of the procedure. Minor complications occurred in 8 patients (17%) and major complications occurred in 2 (4%) who required conversion to open surgery. Various parameters, including patient age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists status, tumor size (5 versus 6.1 cm.), specimen weight (605 versus 638 gm.) and surgical time (3.1 versus 3.1 hours), were comparable between patients undergoing laparoscopic (34) and open (34) radical nephrectomy. However, laparoscopy resulted in decreased blood loss (p <0.001), hospital stay (p <0.001), analgesic requirements (p <0.001) and convalescence (p = 0.005). Complications occurred in 13% of patients in the laparoscopic group and 24% in the open group. CONCLUSIONS: Retroperitoneoscopy is a reliable, effective and, in our hands, the preferred technique of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. At our institution retroperitoneoscopy has emerged as an attractive alternative to open radical nephrectomy in patients with T1-T2N0M0 renal tumors.     

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.     

Outcome and complications of laparoscopic nephrectomy in patients with previous renal surgery

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the technical difficulties, limitations, outcome, and complications of laparoscopic nephrectomy in patients with previous ipsilateral renal surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighteen patients with a history of epsilateral renal surgery underwent laparoscopic simple nephrectomy for benign renal disease at our center between November 2001 and March 2005. All patients were informed about the details of the laparoscopic procedure, and an informed consent was obtained that included the possibility of an emergency laparotomy. All procedures performed were carried out through a transperitoneal approach. A separate table with a laparotomy set was available in the room and ready for open conversion. RESULTS: The procedure was completed in 13 patients. Excluding the cases converted to open surgery, the operative time ranged from 120 to 210 minutes, with a mean of 170 +/- 32.9. The intraoperative blood loss ranged from 30 to 400 cc, with a mean blood loss of 100. Complications included minor visceral injury (liver) in 1 patient, minor bleeding in 2, major bleeding (open conversion) in 1, technical failure (open conversion) in 4, postoperative bleeding (reexploration) in 1, and postoperative renal bed collection in 1. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic nephrectomy is an alternative to the open nephrectomy for the removal of nonfunctioning kidneys in benign diseases and results in less morbidity and a shorter hospital stay. A higher conversion to open and complication rate should be expected in patients with previous open or endoscopic renal surgery and postinflammatory conditions.     

Oncological outcome of 100 laparoscopic radical nephrectomies for clinically localized renal cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic renal surgery is now accepted within the urological community and its indication is extended to oncological operation. The oncological outcome and survival of patients undergoing laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for clinically localized renal cell carcinoma were evaluated. METHODS: From October 1998 to July 2003, 100 patients underwent laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for clinically localized renal cell carcinoma. All operations were performed by transperitoneal approach with early vascular control. Perioperative events and pathological data were recorded prospectively. Patients were followed up by clinical examination, chest radiograph, ultrasonography and/or computed tomography where appropriate. RESULTS: The median age of patients was 61 years. Median operating time was 120 min and blood loss was 100 mL. There were five open conversions. There was no perioperative mortality but 11 patients had complications. Resection margins were clear in all but one patient. The median tumour size was 4.6 cm. The median follow-up time was 30 months. All patients survived up to the date of review. No patient developed port-site recurrence but two patients had recurrence at the renal bed 1 year after the operation. Five patients developed distant metastases involving liver, lung and bone. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is a safe and efficacious treatment option for clinically localized renal cell carcinoma. The intermediate-term oncological outcome appears favourable.     

Comparison of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: A single‐center experience of 100 cases

Objectives: To report our experience with the retroperitoneal and transperitoneal approaches of laparoscopic nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Methods: Between July 2001 and December 2007, 100 patients with RCC underwent laparoscopic radical nephrectomy at our institution for clinically localized RCC. Fifty‐three patients received a retroperitoneal procedure and 47 received a transperitoneal procedure. The perioperative and oncological outcomes of these groups were reviewed retrospectively. Results: Mean follow up was 34 months. No statistically significant difference was found between the two approaches in terms of pathological stage, operative time, need for additional procedures such as adrenalectomy and/or lymph node sampling, estimated blood loss, need for blood transfusions, analgesic requirement, length of hospital stay, or the incidence of minor or major complications. The 5‐year disease‐free survival rate was 90% for both the retroperitoneal and transperitoneal procedures. The 5‐year overall survival rates were 98% and 96%, respectively. Therefore, no significant difference was observed in the long‐term oncological outcome between the two groups. Conclusions: Tumor control and surgical morbidity in laparoscopic radical nephrectomy seem not to be significantly influenced by the approach.     

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.     

Early ligature of renal artery during radical laparoscopic transperitoneal nephrectomy: description of standard technique and direct access

PURPOSE: We compared two techniques of early ligature of the renal artery during transperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: a standard technique and a direct approach to the artery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Of 100 patients undergoing transperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy at our institution, in the last 70, we used early renal-artery ligature. Of these, the standard technique after exposure of the vascular pedicle was used in 45 patients (group A), and ligature with a direct access to the renal artery was attempted in 25 patients (group B). RESULTS: No statistical differences were noted between the two groups in terms of age, lesion size, operative time, estimated blood loss, or intraoperative and postoperative complications. There were no recurrences of disease by CT evaluation in either group during follow-up (range 1-46 months). CONCLUSIONS: Transperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy with direct access to renal artery for early ligature is technically difficult but feasible and safe.     

经腹腔与腹膜后行腹腔镜肾癌根治术的比较

目的:比较经腹腔和腹膜后方式行腹腔镜肾癌根治术的优缺点。方法:随机将60例肾癌患者分别经腹腔或腹膜后方式行腹腔镜下肾癌根治术,比较两组术中、术后的情况。结果:与经腹腔方式比较,腹膜后方式处理肾动脉平均时间、处理肾静脉平均时间、总的手术平均时间较短。但经腹膜和腹膜后方式在估计出血量、术后住院时间、术中并发症和术后并发症发生率上无明显差异。结论:腹腔镜下经腹腔或腹膜后方式行肾癌根治术均有效,但后者在处理肾门和总的手术时间方面更快。     

Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for cancer with level I renal vein involvement

PURPOSE: Venous involvement develops in 5% to 10% of patients with renal cell carcinoma and is generally considered a relative contraindication to laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. To our knowledge we report the initial clinical series of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma associated with level I renal vein thrombus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: At our 2 institutions 8 patients each underwent laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for level I microscopic renal vein thrombus (group 1) and level I gross thrombus (group 2). In all 8 group 2 patients the level I thrombus was preoperatively diagnosed by computerized tomography. Mean renal tumor size in groups 1 and 2 was 7.8 and 12.4 cm., respectively. After controlling the renal artery the renal vein was secured by firing an endoscopic gastrointestinal anastomosis stapler on its collapsed, uninvolved proximal part adjacent to the vena cava. Intraoperative, postoperative and pathological parameters were assessed in the 2 groups. RESULTS: In group 1 laparoscopic radical nephrectomy was technically successful in all 8 patients. Mean operative time was 3.1 hours, mean estimated blood loss was 382 cc and mean hospital stay was 1.9 days. In 1 patient each a soft tissue and a vascular margin was positive for cancer. At a mean follow up of 19.5 months (range 2 to 36) metastatic disease occurred in 3 cases (38%). In group 2 laparoscopic radical nephrectomy was technically successful in 7 cases with open conversion in 1. Mean operative time was 3.3 hours, mean estimated blood loss was 354 cc and mean hospital stay was 2.3 days. Surgical soft tissue and the renal vein vascular margin of the transected vein were negative for cancer in all 8 cases. At a mean followup of 9.4 months (range 5 to 16) pulmonary metastasis developed in 1 patient (13%). CONCLUSIONS: Although it is an advanced procedure, laparoscopic radical nephrectomy in patients with level I renal vein thrombus is feasible, safe and follows established oncological principles.     

Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for T1 renal cancer: the gold standard? A comparison of laparoscopic vs open nephrectomy

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the complication rate and clinical follow-up of patients treated for T1 renal cancer by open or laparoscopic nephrectomy at the same institution, as this approach appears to be attractive for treating small renal cancers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1995 and 2002, 39 patients underwent retroperitoneal laparoscopic and 26 transperitoneal open radical nephrectomy for T1 renal cancer (TNM 1997). Variables before during and after surgery, e.g. cancer recurrence, were compared between the groups. RESULTS: There were no differences between the laparoscopic and open groups in age, sex ratio, weight, height, fitness score, operative duration (134 vs 133 min), minor or major complications, tumour diameter, Fuhrman grade or length of follow-up. Patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery had less blood loss (133 vs 357 mL, P < 0.001), less need for transfusion (none vs 150 mL, P = 0.04), a lower consumption of analgesia drugs, and shorter hospitalization (5.5 vs 8.8 days, P < 0.001). With a mean follow-up of 20.4 months there was no recurrence or tumour progression. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for patients with T1 renal cancer is a safe, reliable procedure that decreases hospitalization time and bleeding, and ensures the same cancer control as open nephrectomy.