-
Investigative and Clinical Urology Sep 2020This study aimed to determine the effectiveness and safety of partial nephrectomy (PN) without ischemia compared with PN with warm ischemia for reducing the... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
This study aimed to determine the effectiveness and safety of partial nephrectomy (PN) without ischemia compared with PN with warm ischemia for reducing the deterioration in renal function in patients with cT1 renal tumors.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We conducted a systematic review that included patients over 18 years of age who underwent PN with or without warm ischemia for cT1 renal tumors. The primary outcome was impaired renal function. A search strategy was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CENTRAL, the article reference lists, and the unpublished literature to reach saturation of the information. We assessed the risk of bias with the methodological index for nonrandomized studies (MINORS) tool, and we performed a meta-analysis according to the type of variable.
RESULTS
We found a total of 5,682 articles, of which 14 met the inclusion criteria. Seven studies evaluated renal function, identifying a difference in means (MD) of 3.50 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16 to 5.83), favoring no ischemia. We did not find any significant differences regarding intraoperative bleeding or operative time (MD, 55 mL; 95% CI, -33.16 to 144.08; and MD, 1.87; 95% CI, -20.47 to 24.21; respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
In this study, PN without ischemia showed a decrease in deterioration of the estimated glomerular filtration rate compared with warm ischemia.
Topics: Humans; Kidney Neoplasms; Neoplasm Staging; Nephrectomy; Treatment Outcome; Warm Ischemia
PubMed: 32869563
DOI: 10.4111/icu.20190313 -
Cancer Medicine Jun 2020Radical nephrectomy (RN) was the standard treatment for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, recent studies have found that partial nephrectomy (PN) could achieve... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Radical nephrectomy (RN) was the standard treatment for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, recent studies have found that partial nephrectomy (PN) could achieve similar effects as radical nephrectomy, and has the advantages of less bleeding and shorter hospital stay. The choice of surgical strategies has become a concern of clinicians, which could be guided by renal score introduced by Kutikov et al Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to clarify the value of renal score of determining surgical strategies and predicting complications.
METHODS
The keywords "RENAL score," "renal nephrometry score," or "nephrometry score" were used to retrieve electronic databases for relevant literature up to Feb 2020, including PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library. Surgical strategies and complications are outcome measures. Risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) is applied to assess the effect size.
RESULTS
A total of 20 studies met the selection criteria for meta-analysis. There was significant difference in RN operation rate for each subgroup (low-moderate: RR = 3.50, 95% Cl = 2.60-4.71, P < .001; low-high: RR = 6.29, 95% Cl = 4.40-9.00, P < .001; moderate-high: RR = 1.80, 95% Cl = 1.39-2.32, P < .001).The overall incidence of complications from high renal score group was significantly higher than that in low renal score group (low-moderate: RR = 1.32, 95% Cl = 1.03-1.69, P = .026; low-high: RR = 2.45, 95% Cl = 1.48-4.07, P = .001; moderate-high: RR = 1.75, 95% Cl = 1.17-2.61, P = .007).
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis indicated that renal score is an efficient tool for determining surgical strategies and predicting complications in PN. More prospective research is essential to verify the predictive value of renal score.
Topics: Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Humans; Kidney Neoplasms; Nephrectomy; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32281277
DOI: 10.1002/cam4.2993 -
Urology Journal Mar 2020Radical nephrectomy (RN) and partial nephrectomy (PN) are widely used for early-stage renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, the results were inconsistent while comparing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Radical nephrectomy (RN) and partial nephrectomy (PN) are widely used for early-stage renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, the results were inconsistent while comparing the efficiency of RN and PN. This study aimed to assess the perioperative effectiveness of RN and PN for treating RCC.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library electronic database were searched for studies on adults with RCC comparing RN and PN published until September 2019. The perioperative efficacy and safety outcomes were calculated using odds ratio (OR) and standard mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous and continuous data, respectively. Subgroup analysis were conducted based on tumor stage and surgery methods for evaluation of the treatment effect on specific subsets.
RESULTS
A total of 23 studies involving 30,018 patients with RCC were included in this meta-analysis. Notably, RCC treated with PN was associated with low incidences of hospital mortality (OR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.38-0.89; P = 0.013) and reoperation rate (OR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.58-0.95; P = 0.016) as compared to RN. However, PN was associated with an increased risk of overall postoperative complications (OR: 1.40; 95% CI: 1.17-1.68, P < 0.001), postoperative hemorrhagic complications (OR: 1.92; 95% CI: 1.28-2.87, P = 0.002), and urinary fistula (OR: 17.65; 95% CI: 5.35-58.30, P < 0.001) as compared to RN.
CONCLUSION
These findings suggested that PN was associated with lower incidences of hospital mortality and reoperation rate, whereas RN was associated with fewer complications.
Topics: Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Humans; Neoplasm Staging; Nephrectomy; Postoperative Complications; Reoperation; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32180211
DOI: 10.22037/uj.v0i0.5358 -
Translational Andrology and Urology Dec 2019The role of radio frequency ablation (RFA) in small renal tumors remains controversial. This systematic review was performed to compare clinical outcomes of RFA versus...
BACKGROUND
The role of radio frequency ablation (RFA) in small renal tumors remains controversial. This systematic review was performed to compare clinical outcomes of RFA versus partial nephrectomy (PN) for the treatment of T1 renal tumors.
METHODS
A total of 11 studies including 2,397 patients were analyzed in this systematic review after searching the databases of PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science. P value and odds ratio (OR)/hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to evaluate the strength of the association.
RESULTS
A total of six studies (2,056 patients) provided either survival curves or HR and its 95% CI, demonstrating that the majority of the patients with RFA treatment tended to exhibit a similar long-term survival rate to those with PN treatment. In addition, according to four studies, no differences were found in the overall rate of complications between the two groups. Furthermore, there were significant differences in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) change between the two methods in four studies but no differences were observed in other two.
CONCLUSIONS
Our systematic review indicated that RFA is an effective treatment option which could provide comparable oncologic outcomes to PN. Moreover, it may present obvious advantages in renal function preservation.
PubMed: 32038956
DOI: 10.21037/tau.2019.10.13 -
Archivos Espanoles de Urologia Oct 2019Renal cryotherapy (RC) is an alternative therapeutic option to partial nephrectomy in elderly patients and/or patients with comorbidities. The technique can be guided by...
OBJECTIVE
Renal cryotherapy (RC) is an alternative therapeutic option to partial nephrectomy in elderly patients and/or patients with comorbidities. The technique can be guided by ultrasound, CT and MRI. Although CT is the most used technique, there are no comparative studies. The objective of this study was to review the current status of ultrasound as a guide for the planning and execution of RC.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was carried out in the Pubmed/Medline database following the PRISMA guidelines. We used 42 articles that met the inclusion criteria for the synthesis of the evidence.
RESULTS
Ultrasound allows dynamic and real-time monitoring of the entire procedure to guide the biopsy, placement of the cryoprobes, cryoball formation, and early identification of complications. The success rate and recurrences found in the percutaneous renal cryotherapy (PRC) were 97.04% and 1.81%, respectively, with 9.35% complications. The ultrasound during laparoscopic renal cryotherapy (LRC) has been shown to reduce the time spent in localizing the renal mass and also decreases the need for large dissections. On the other hand, contrast-enhanced ultrasound during follow-up shows a concordance with the CT or MRI of 72-96% and no complications have been described associated with its execution.
CONCLUSION
Renal cryotherapy guided by ultrasound is a feasible technique, its main advantage is based on real-time monitoring during the procedure. The PRC presents an acceptable rate of complications and excellent oncological results. The LRC allows a rapid localization of the renal mass and reduces extensive dissections. During follow-up, the use of contrast ultrasound is a safe alternative that has been shown to have a good degree of agreement with respect to CT and MRI.
Topics: Aged; Cryosurgery; Cryotherapy; Humans; Kidney Neoplasms; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Nephrectomy; Ultrasonography, Interventional
PubMed: 31579033
DOI: No ID Found -
BMC Urology Aug 2019Strong evidence comparing effectiveness between nephron-sparing intervention (NSI) and active surveillance (AS) is lacking. Thus, we aim to compare the outcomes of... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Strong evidence comparing effectiveness between nephron-sparing intervention (NSI) and active surveillance (AS) is lacking. Thus, we aim to compare the outcomes of survival, including cancer-specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), and cardiovascular-specific survival (CVSS), in patients with renal masses who underwent NSI or AS.
METHODS
A systematic literature search of PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE was performed for citations published prior to September 2018 that described NSI, partial nephrectomy and thermal ablation included, and AS for patients with renal masses and a standard meta-analysis on survival outcomes was then conducted.
RESULTS
The meta-analysis included seven studies containing 5809 patients. The results comparing NSI with AS were as follows: CSS (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.46-0.89, P < 0.001), OS (HR = 0.46, 95%CI: 0.39-0.53, P < 0.001), and CVSS (HR = 0.37, 95%CI: 0.24-0.57, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review and meta-analysis indicates that NSI is associated with better OS, CSS and CVSS when compared with AS for patients with renal masses. Further better prospective cohort studies are needed to make definitive statements about these different treatment methods.
Topics: Humans; Kidney Neoplasms; Nephrectomy; Nephrons; Organ Sparing Treatments; Survival Rate; Treatment Outcome; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 31382939
DOI: 10.1186/s12894-019-0503-3 -
Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica = the... Oct 2019This manuscript is a review of current studies and conducts a meta-analysis on the topic of partial nephrectomy (PN) and radical nephrectomy (RN) in larger renal tumors... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
This manuscript is a review of current studies and conducts a meta-analysis on the topic of partial nephrectomy (PN) and radical nephrectomy (RN) in larger renal tumors (cT2 and greater).
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
A systematic research of PubMed, Ovid, Scopus (up to January 2019), and reference lists was performed to identify eligible comparative studies. All studies comparing PN with RN for cT2 or greater renal tumors were included. The quality of the included trials was assessed and the data were extracted independently by two reviewers. Statistical analyses were performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager (RevMan) 5.3 software.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Overall, 11 retrospective cohort studies including 19,281 patients (PN 1,146; RN 18,135) were included in the analysis. The tumor size was likely smaller in PN compared with RN (WMD -0.85 cm; P=0.05). Lower estimated blood loss (EBL) was found for RN (WMD 100.44 mL; P<0.001). The length of hospital stay was longer for PN (WMD 1.07 days; P=0.002). There was a higher likelihood of postoperative complications for PN (RR 1.96; P<0.001). PN was associated with better postoperative renal function (eGFR; WMD 7.31 mL/min/1.73 m2; P<0.001), and lower decline in eGFR (WMD -9.00 mL/min/1.73 m2; P<0.001). The positive margins were more common in PN (RR 4.19; P=0.003). The PN group might be non-inferior to RN for tumor recurrence (RR 0.57; P<0.001), tumor-specific mortality (RR 0.58; P=0.007), and all-cause mortality (RR 0.78; P=0.004).
CONCLUSIONS
PN shows a feasible, safe and viable treatment option for larger renal tumors because it provides better preservation of kidney function and non-inferior survival. However, PN in patients with stage T2 or greater renal masses should be more selective, because of higher complications.
Topics: Humans; Kidney Neoplasms; Margins of Excision; Nephrectomy; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 31287256
DOI: 10.23736/S0393-2249.19.03470-2 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2019Tumor enucleation (TE) and partial nephrectomy (PN) have both become main treatment strategies for T1 renal cell carcinoma (RCC), despite the discrepancy between their...
Tumor enucleation (TE) and partial nephrectomy (PN) have both become main treatment strategies for T1 renal cell carcinoma (RCC), despite the discrepancy between their safety margin. We performed a meta-analysis on all the relevant trials in order to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of TE with those of PN for RCC treatment. In this meta-analysis, randomized controlled trials or retrospective studies were included if they compared TE and PN therapy in patients with localized renal cancer. The main outcomes extracted were perioperative data and post-operative outcomes. Subgroups for analyses were undertaken according to tumor size and duration of follow up. Data were pooled using the generic variance method with a fixed or random effects model and expressed as mean differences or odds ratios with 95% CI. A total of 13 studies containing 1,792 patients undergoing TE and 3,068 undergoing PN were identified. Our study showed that the patients received TE had significantly shorter operative time (MD = -28.46, 95% CI = -42.09, -14.83, < 0.0001), less hospital day (MD = -0.68, 95% CI = -1.04, -0.31, = 0.0003), less estimate blood loss (MD = -59.90, 95% CI = -93.23, -26.58, = 0.0004) and smaller change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (fixed effect: MD = 4.66, 95% CI = 1.67, 7.66, = 0.002), fewer complications (fixed effect: OR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.50, 0.85, = 0.001) compared with those received PN. However, there were no significant differences in terms of warm ischemic time, positive margin rates, recurrence rates and survival rates between the two groups. All the subgroup analyses presented consistent results with the overall analyses. Our findings suggested that TE is not only less-traumatizing and beneficial for recovery, but also better for renal function protection. Moreover, it did not show the evidence of an increase relapse rate or mortality rate when compared with PN.
PubMed: 31214511
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2019.00473 -
BMC Urology Jun 2019The efficacy of partial nephrectomy (PN) for T1b renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is controversial. The oncological outcomes, the change in postoperative renal function and... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Comparison of the long-term follow-up and perioperative outcomes of partial nephrectomy and radical nephrectomy for 4 cm to 7 cm renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
The efficacy of partial nephrectomy (PN) for T1b renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is controversial. The oncological outcomes, the change in postoperative renal function and the perioperative complications are unclear.
METHODS
We searched PUBMED, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register for studies from March 1998 to March 2018 for studies comparing PN to radical nephrectomy (RN) for the treatment of T1b RCC. After data extraction and quality assessment, we used RevMan 5.2 to pool the data. Then, we used Stata 12.0 to perform sensitivity analyses and meta-regression. We used the GRADE profiler to evaluate the evidence according to the GRADE approach.
RESULTS
A total of 16 studies involving 33,117 patients were included in our meta-analysis. No significant difference was found in the 5-year overall survival (OS), 10-year OS, 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) and 10-year RFS. The 5-year cancer-special survival (CSS) and 10-year CSS were better in RN compared to PN, respectively, at RR = 1.02, P < 0.05 and RR = 1.04, P < 0.05. PN was better than RN in the preservation of renal function (WMD = -9.15, 95% CI: - 10.30 to - 7.99, P < 0.05). The confidence level grading of the evidence was moderate for 5-year OS, 10-year OS, 5-year CSS, 10-year CSS, 5-year RFS, 10-year RFS, tumor recurrence, decline in eGFR, and postoperative complications.
CONCLUSIONS
PN may provide comparable outcomes in terms of RFS & OS, and better renal function preservation although CSS was worse.
Topics: Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Kidney Neoplasms; Nephrectomy; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Tumor Burden
PubMed: 31174522
DOI: 10.1186/s12894-019-0480-6