-
Minerva Urology and Nephrology Dec 2023In the absence of consensus on the optimal approach to renorrhaphy in partial nephrectomy, this systematic review aims to assess the various renorrhaphy techniques and...
INTRODUCTION
In the absence of consensus on the optimal approach to renorrhaphy in partial nephrectomy, this systematic review aims to assess the various renorrhaphy techniques and their impact on surgical outcomes.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
A systematic review of the literature was performed in March 2022, using PubMed and Scopus, without time restrictions and research filters for studies investigating renorrhaphy techniques in partial nephrectomy. Studies providing sufficient details on renorrhaphy techniques and their outcomes during minimally invasive partial nephrectomy (PN) were included in this analysis.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Thirty-one studies with 5720 patients were included in the analysis. In most studies, tumor diameter was <4 cm. RENAL and PADUA scores as well as tumor locations were heterogeneous between the studies. The results of the use of hemostatic agents were conflicting among different studies with limited evidence regarding the benefits of its routine use in partial nephrectomy. The use of barbed and running sutures was associated with a reduced warm ischemia time. While some studies showed a decreased warm ischemia time when omitting cortical renorrhaphy, others found that it may lead to higher incidence of minor complications without any significant improvement in other outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
There is ongoing research to determine the optimal approach to renorrhaphy. The current evidence on the routine use of hemostatic agents is limited. The use of certain techniques such as barbed sutures, sliding clips and running sutures reduced the warm ischemia time. The omission of cortical renorrhaphy is still controversial.
Topics: Humans; Kidney Neoplasms; Suture Techniques; Nephrectomy; Kidney; Hemostatics
PubMed: 38126283
DOI: 10.23736/S2724-6051.23.05345-4 -
The Journal of Urology Jul 2012The relative effectiveness of partial vs radical nephrectomy remains unclear in light of the recent phase 3 European Organization for the Research and Treatment of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
The relative effectiveness of partial vs radical nephrectomy remains unclear in light of the recent phase 3 European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer trial. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of partial vs radical nephrectomy for localized renal tumors, considering all cause and cancer specific mortality, and severe chronic kidney disease.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE®, EMBASE®, Scopus and Web of Science® were searched for sporadic renal tumors that were surgically treated with partial or radical nephrectomy. Generic inverse variance with fixed effects models were used to determine the pooled HR for each outcome.
RESULTS
Data from 21, 21 and 9 studies were pooled for all cause and cancer specific mortality, and severe chronic kidney disease, respectively. Overall 31,729 (77%) and 9,281 patients (23%) underwent radical and partial nephrectomy, respectively. According to pooled estimates partial nephrectomy correlated with a 19% risk reduction in all cause mortality (HR 0.81, p < 0.0001), a 29% risk reduction in cancer specific mortality (HR 0.71, p = 0.0002) and a 61% risk reduction in severe chronic kidney disease (HR 0.39, p < 0.0001). However, the pooled estimate of cancer specific mortality for partial nephrectomy was limited by the lack of robustness in consistent findings on sensitivity and subgroup analyses.
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings suggest that partial nephrectomy confers a survival advantage and a lower risk of severe chronic kidney disease after surgery for localized renal tumors. However, the results should be evaluated in the context of the low quality of the existing evidence and the significant heterogeneity across studies. Future research should use higher quality evidence to clearly demonstrate that partial nephrectomy confers superior survival and renal function.
Topics: Cause of Death; Europe; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Humans; Kidney Function Tests; Kidney Neoplasms; Nephrectomy; Recovery of Function; Survival Rate; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 22591957
DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.03.006 -
Cancer Medicine Aug 2021To parallelly compare the applicability of the radius, exophytic/endophytic, nearness, anterior/posterior, location nephrometry score (R.E.N.A.L.), the Preoperative... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To parallelly compare the applicability of the radius, exophytic/endophytic, nearness, anterior/posterior, location nephrometry score (R.E.N.A.L.), the Preoperative Aspects and Dimensions Used for an Anatomical (PADUA), and the centrality index (C-index) scoring systems in predicting clinical outcomes after partial nephrectomy (PN).
METHODS
We searched EMBASE, PubMed, Ovid, and Web of Science to perform a meta-analysis examining the correlation coefficients between three nephrometry scores (NSs) and warm ischemia time (WIT), estimated blood loss (EBL), operation time (OT), length of stay (LOS), and absolute change in eGFR (ACE) up to 25 January 2021.
RESULTS
In total, 13 studies including 1496 patients met the criteria for further analysis. Overall, all scoring systems had statistically significant correlations with the WIT, EBL, OT, ACE and LOS and ACE, except for the correlation between PADUA and LOS (r = 0.16 [-0.00, 0.31], p > 0.05). The C-index had the strongest correlation with WIT (r = -0.35 [-0.43, -0.26], p < 0.05) and ACE (r = -0.29 [-0.48, -0.10], p < 0.05). Weak correlations were observed between OT as well as EBL and each scoring system. Publication bias was observed in PADUA score predicting ACE (p = 0.04) and high heterogeneity was found in some of our results.
CONCLUSION
Until now, this is the first meta-analysis that parallelly compares these three scoring systems in predicting outcomes after PN. We found that all NSs showed a statistically significant correlation with WIT, EBL, OT, and ACE. Moreover, the C-index scoring system is the best predictor of WIT and ACE. Due to the existence of publication bias and high heterogeneity, more well-designed and large-scale studies are warranted for validation.
Topics: Blood Loss, Surgical; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Humans; Kidney; Kidney Neoplasms; Length of Stay; Nephrectomy; Operative Time; Publication Bias; Research Design; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Warm Ischemia
PubMed: 34258874
DOI: 10.1002/cam4.4047 -
Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced... Jun 2014For small renal masses (SRMs), open partial nephrectomy represents the therapeutic standard of care, and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) has provided encouraging... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Laparoscopic renal cryoablation versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for the treatment of small renal masses: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.
BACKGROUND
For small renal masses (SRMs), open partial nephrectomy represents the therapeutic standard of care, and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) has provided encouraging outcomes. Laparoscopic renal cryoablation (LRC) could be regarded as an alternative to surgical excision in selected patients, if perioperative complication rates and oncologic results are comparable. However, the short- and long-term outcomes of LRC versus LPN have not been adequately assessed. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of LRC compared with LPN in the treatment of SRMs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic search of the Medline, Scopus, and CNKI databases and the Cochrane Library was performed up to October 1, 2013. Outcomes of interest assessing the two techniques included demographic and clinical baseline characteristics, surgical and oncological variables, renal function, and complications.
RESULTS
Nine eligible trials (555 cases and 642 controls) assessing LRC versus LPN were identified, including two prospective and seven retrospective studies. Patients undergoing LRC were significantly older (weighted mean difference [WMD], 6.48 years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.12-9.83; P<.001) and had a higher solitary kidney rate (odds ratio [OR]=3.76; 95% CI, 2.05-6.92; P<.001). Although LRC was associated with shorter operative time (WMD, -54.28 minutes; 95% CI, -83.79 to -24.78; P<.001), less blood loss (WMD, -111.75 mL; 95% CI, -147.96 to -75.53; P<.001), lower risk of conversion (OR=0.17; 95% CI, 0.05-0.60; P=.005), and fewer overall complications (OR=0.53; 95% CI, 0.29-0.98; P=.04), especially the rate of intraoperative complications (OR=0.20; 95% CI, 0.07-0.58; P=.003) and major complications (OR=0.45; 95% CI, 0.25-0.81; P=.008), patients having LPN might still benefit from a significantly lower local recurrence rate (OR=13.03; 95% CI, 4.20-40.39; P<.001) and lower distant metastasis rate (OR=9.05; 95% CI, 2.31-35.51; P=.002).
CONCLUSIONS
Compared with LPN, LRC was associated with reliable perioperative safety, comparable renal function, and fewer complications; however, LRC may still result in a higher risk of tumor progression. Therefore, our meta-analysis suggested that LRC was associated with worse oncological outcomes than LPN but that LRC may be indicated in selected patients with significant comorbidity. Because of the inherent limitations of the included studies, further large sample, prospective, multicenter, and long-term follow-up studies are awaited to corroborate these findings.
Topics: Cryosurgery; Humans; Kidney Function Tests; Kidney Neoplasms; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Nephrectomy; Operative Time; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24914926
DOI: 10.1089/lap.2013.0550 -
In Vivo (Athens, Greece) 2022Trifecta represents a composite outcome reflecting the quality level of treatment in nephron sparing surgery. However, there is substantial heterogeneity concerning the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND/AIM
Trifecta represents a composite outcome reflecting the quality level of treatment in nephron sparing surgery. However, there is substantial heterogeneity concerning the criteria required for its fulfilment. The present study aimed to highlight the potential of a unified view for the different definitions of trifecta when comparing robotic and open approaches in partial nephrectomy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic literature search was carried out for all relevant comparative studies published until April 2022. Trifecta definitions were clustered according to two criteria for postoperative renal function reduction. The first set as an upper limit the 10% decrease in the estimated glomerular filtration rate, while the second set as an upper limit 25 min of ischemia. To mathematically investigate the point of intersection between the above two groups, a suitable model of volume conservation equations was formulated.
RESULTS
A total of 11 studies were investigated for their methodological features and grouped accordingly. The ischemic zone volume surrounding the tumor resection site emerged as the central parameter connecting the two main definitions. Specifically, for patients with solitary renal masses, a given change in the value of one parameter resulted in a fixed change in the value of the other.
CONCLUSION
The two main definitions of the "trifecta outcome" extracted from the international literature represent the two sides of the same coin. Thus, trifecta achievement rates could be utilized by future studies as aggregate data to yield a quantitative estimate of the comparative effect between robotic and open approaches in partial nephrectomy procedures.
Topics: Humans; Models, Theoretical; Nephrectomy; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36309375
DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12992 -
BJU International Jun 2019To summarize the available evidence on renorrhaphy techniques and to assess their impact on peri-operative outcomes after minimally invasive partial nephrectomy (MIPN). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To summarize the available evidence on renorrhaphy techniques and to assess their impact on peri-operative outcomes after minimally invasive partial nephrectomy (MIPN).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was performed in January 2018 without time restrictions, using MEDLINE, Cochrane and Web of Science databases according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement recommendations. Studies providing sufficient details on renorrhaphy techniques during laparoscopic or robot-assisted partial nephrectomy and comparative studies focused on peri-operative outcomes were included in qualitative and quantitative analyses, respectively.
RESULTS
Overall, 67 and 19 studies were included in the qualitative and quantitative analyses, respectively. The overall quality of evidence was low. Specific tumour features (i.e. size, hilar location, anatomical complexity, nearness to renal sinus and/or urinary collecting system), surgeon's experience, robot-assisted technology, as well as the aim of reducing warm ischaemia time and the amount of devascularized renal parenchyma preserved represented the key factors driving the evolution of the renorrhaphy techniques during MIPN over the past decade. Quantitative synthesis showed that running suture was associated with shorter operating and ischaemia time, and lower postoperative complication and transfusion rates than interrupted suture. Barbed suture had lower operating and ischaemia time and less blood loss than non-barbed suture. The single-layer suture technique was associated with shorter operating and ischaemia time than the double-layer technique. No comparisons were possible concerning renal functional outcomes because of non-homogeneous data reporting.
CONCLUSIONS
Renorrhaphy techniques significantly evolved over the years, improving outcomes. Running suture, particularly using barbed wires, shortened the operating and ischaemia times. A further advantage could derive from avoiding a double-layer suture.
Topics: Humans; Kidney Neoplasms; Laparoscopy; Nephrectomy; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Suture Techniques; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30216617
DOI: 10.1111/bju.14537 -
European Urology Oncology Dec 2022Use of three-dimensional (3D) guidance for nephron-sparing surgery (NSS) has increased in popularity, especially for laparoscopic and robotic approaches. Different 3D... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
CONTEXT
Use of three-dimensional (3D) guidance for nephron-sparing surgery (NSS) has increased in popularity, especially for laparoscopic and robotic approaches. Different 3D visualization modalities have been developed as promising new tools for surgical planning and intraoperative navigation.
OBJECTIVES
To summarize and evaluate the impact of 3D models on minimally invasive NSS in terms of perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
A systematic literature search was conducted in December 2021 using the Medline (PubMed), Embase (Ovid), Scopus, and Web of Science databases. The protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022300948). The search strategy used the PICOS (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Study design) criteria and article selection was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The risk of bias and the quality of the articles included were assessed. A dedicated data extraction form was used to collect the data of interest. Meta-analysis was performed using the Mantel-Haenszel method for binary outcomes, with results summarized as the odds ratio (OR), and the inverse variance method for continuous data, with results reported as the mean difference (MD). All effect estimates are reported with the 95% confidence interval (CI) and p ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant. All analyses were performed using R software and the meta package.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
The initial electronic search identified 450 papers, of which 17 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Use of 3D technology led to a significant reduction in the global ischemia rate (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.07-0.76; p = 0.02) and facilitated more frequent enucleation (OR 2.54, 95% CI 1.36-4.74; p < 0.01) and less frequent opening of the collecting system (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.15-0.89; p = 0.03) and was associated with less blood loss (MD 23.1 ml, 95% CI 31.8-14.4; p < 0.01). 3D guidance for NSS was associated with a significant reduction in the transfusion rate (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07-0.56; p < 0.01). There were no significant differences in rates of conversion to radical nephrectomy, minor and major complications, change in glomerular filtration rate, or surgical margins (all p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
3D guidance for NSS is associated with lower rates of detriment and surgical injury to the kidney. Specifically, a lower amount of nontumor renal parenchyma is exposed to ischemia or sacrificed during resection, and opening of the collecting system is less frequent. However, use of 3D technology does not lead to significant improvements in oncological or functional outcomes.
PATIENT SUMMARY
We reviewed the use of three-dimensional tools for minimally invasive surgery for partial removal of the kidney in patients with kidney cancer. The evidence suggests that these tools have benefits during surgery, but do not lead to significant improvements in cancer control or functional outcomes for patients.
Topics: Humans; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Treatment Outcome; Nephrectomy; Kidney Neoplasms; Carcinoma, Renal Cell
PubMed: 36216739
DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2022.09.003 -
European Urology Focus Jul 2019During robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN), various techniques of hilar control have been described, including on-clamp, early unclamping, selective/super-selective... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
CONTEXT
During robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN), various techniques of hilar control have been described, including on-clamp, early unclamping, selective/super-selective clamping, and completely-unclamped RPN.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the impact of various hilar control techniques on perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes of RPN for tumors.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of all comparative studies on various hilar control techniques during RPN using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis statement, and Methods and Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Review of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Cumulative meta-analysis of comparative studies was conducted using Review Manager 5.3.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Of 987 RPN publications in the literature, 19 qualified for this analysis. Comparison of off-clamp versus on-clamp RPN (n=9), selective clamping versus on-clamp RPN (n=3), super selective clamping versus on-clamp RPN (n=5), and early unclamped versus on-clamp (n=3) were reported. Patients undergoing RPN using off-clamp, selective/super selective, or early unclamp techniques had higher estimated blood loss compared with on-clamp RPN (weight mean difference [WMD]: 47.83, p=0.000, WMD: 41.06, p=0.02, and WMD: 37.50, p=0.47); however, this did not seem clinically relevant, since transfusion rates were similar (odds ratio [OR]: 0.98, p=0.95, OR: 0.72, p=0.7, and OR: 1.36, p=0.33, respectively). All groups appeared similar with regards to hospital stay, transfusions, overall and major complications, and positive cancer margin rates. Short- and long-term renal functional outcomes appeared superior in the off-clamp and super selective clamp groups compared with the on-clamp RPN cohort.
CONCLUSIONS
Off-clamp, selective/super selective clamp, and early unclamp hilar control techniques are safe and feasible approaches for RPN surgery, with similar perioperative and oncological outcomes compared with on-clamp RPN. Minimizing global renal ischemia may provide superior renal function preservation. However, higher quality data are necessary for definitive conclusions in this regard.
PATIENT SUMMARY
The objective of partial nephrectomy is to treat the cancer while maximizing renal function preservation. Clamping the main vessels is done primarily to reduce the blood loss during partial nephrectomy; however, vascular clamping can compromise kidney function. In order to avoid clamping, various techniques have been described. Our analysis showed that techniques that avoid main renal artery clamping during RPN are associated with better renal function preservation, yet deliver non-inferior perioperative and oncological outcomes as compared with RPN procedures that clamp the main vessels.
Topics: Constriction; Humans; Kidney; Kidney Neoplasms; Nephrectomy; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29422419
DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2018.01.012 -
Surgical Innovation Dec 2019. The warm ischemia time (WIT) is key to successful laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN). The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis comparing the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
. The warm ischemia time (WIT) is key to successful laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN). The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis comparing the self-retaining barbed suture (SRBS) with a non-SRBS for parenchymal repair during LPN. A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library was performed up to March 2018. Inclusion criteria for this study were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational comparative studies assessing the SRBS and non-SRBS for parenchymal repair during LPN. Outcomes of interest included WIT, complications, overall operative time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, and change of renal function. One RCT and 7 retrospective studies were identified, which included a total of 461 cases. Compared with the non-SRBS, use of the SRBS for parenchymal repair during LPN was associated with shorter WIT ( < .00001), shorter overall operative time ( < .00001), lower estimated blood loss ( = .02), and better renal function preservation ( = .001). There was no significant difference between the SRBS and non-SRBS with regard to complications ( = .08) and length of hospital stay ( = .25). The SRBS for parenchymal repair during LPN can significantly shorten the WIT and overall operative time, decrease blood loss, and preserve renal function.
Topics: Humans; Kidney; Kidney Neoplasms; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Nephrectomy; Operative Time; Postoperative Complications; Suture Techniques; Sutures; Treatment Outcome; Warm Ischemia
PubMed: 31215335
DOI: 10.1177/1553350619856167 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2020The purpose of this meta-analysis was to systematically assess the influence of three-dimensional (3D) printing technology in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) of...
Three-Dimensional Printing Assisted Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy vs. Conventional Nephrectomy in Patients With Complex Renal Tumor: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
The purpose of this meta-analysis was to systematically assess the influence of three-dimensional (3D) printing technology in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) of complex renal tumors. A systematic literature review was performed in June 2020 using the Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane library, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and the Wanfang Databases to identify relevant studies. The data relative to operation time, warm ischemic time, intraoperative blood loss, positive surgical margin, reduction in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and complications (including artery embolization, hematoma, urinary fistula, transfusion, hematuria, intraoperative bleeding, and fever) were extracted. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of all included studies, and the eligible studies were included and analyzed using the Stata 12.1 software. A subgroup analysis was performed stratifying patients according to the complexity of the tumor and surgery type or to the nephrometry score. One randomized controlled trial (RCT), two prospective controlled studies (PCS), and seven retrospective comparative studies (RCS) were analyzed, involving a total of 647 patients. Our meta-analysis showed that there were significant differences in operation time, warm ischemic time, intraoperative blood loss, reduction in eGFR, and complications between the LPN with 3D-preoperative assessment (LPN-3DPA) vs. LPN with conventional 2D preoperative assessment (LPN-C2DPA) groups. Positive surgical margin did not differ significantly. The LPN-3DPA group showed shorter operation time and warm ischemic time, as well as less intraoperative blood loss, reduction in eGFR, fewer complications for patients with complex renal tumor. Therefore, LPN assisted by three-dimensional printing technology should be a preferable treatment of complex renal tumor when compared with conventional LPN. However, further large-scale RCTs are needed in the future to confirm these findings.
PubMed: 33194610
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.551985