A propensity-matched comparison of perioperative complications and of chronic kidney disease between robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy and radiofrequency ablative therapy

Is Ablation Suitable For Small Renal Masses? A Meta-Analysis

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

To compare perioperative and oncology outcomes of ablation and partial nephrectomy in small renal masses (SRMs).

METHODS

We conduct this meta-analysis strictly according to the PRISMA standard, and the quality evaluation follows the AMSTAR standard. Four databases, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, were systematically searched. The search time range is from database creation to November 2023. Stata16 statistical software was used for statistical analysis. Weighted mean difference (WMD) represented continuity variables, odds ratio or relative risk (OR/RR) represented dichotomies variables, and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 27 studies, including 6030 patients. Results showed that patients undergoing partial nephrectomy were younger (WMD = -5.45 years, 95%CI [-7.44, -3.46], P < 0.05), had longer operation time (WMD = 64.91 min, 95%CI [44.47, 85.34], P < 0.05), had longer length of stay (WMD = 2.91 days, 95%CI [2.04, 3.78], P < 0.05), and had more estimated blood loss (WMD = 97.76 ml, 95%CI [69.48, 126.04]. P < 0.05), the overall complication rate was higher (OR = 1.84, 95%CI [1.48, 2.29], P < 0.05), the major complication rate was higher (OR = 1.98, 95%CI [1.36, 2.88], P < 0.05), and the recurrence rate was lower (OR = 0.32, 95%Cl [0.20, 0.50], P < 0.05). However, there were no differences between ablation and partial nephrectomy in cancer-specific survival (CSS) (HR = 2.07, 95%CI [0.61, 7.04], P > 0.05), overall survival (OS) (HR = 1.24, 95%CI [0.58, 2.65], P > 0.05), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR = 2.68, 95%CI [0.91, 7.88], P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing partial nephrectomy are younger, have longer operation time and length of stay, and have higher complication rate. However, there was no significant difference in CSS, OS, and RFS between partial nephrectomy and ablation, but more well-designed, high-quality studies are needed to confirm this.

Perioperative, functional and oncologic outcomes of percutaneous ablation versus minimally invasive partial nephrectomy for clinical T1 renal tumors: outcomes from a pooled analysis

The objective of this study was to perform a comprehensive pooled analysis aimed at comparing the efficacy and safety of percutaneous ablation (PCA) versus minimally invasive partial nephrectomy (MIPN), including robotic and laparoscopic approaches, in patients diagnosed with cT1 renal tumors. We conducted a comprehensive search across four major electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, targeting studies published in English up to April 2024. The primary outcomes evaluated in this analysis included perioperative outcomes, functional outcomes, and oncological outcomes. A total of 2449 patients across 17 studies were included in the analysis. PCA demonstrated superior outcomes compared to MIPN in terms of shorter hospital stays (WMD: - 2.13 days; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: - 3.29, - 0.97; p = 0.0003), reduced operative times (WMD: - 109.99 min; 95% CI: - 141.40, - 78.59; p < 0.00001), and lower overall complication rates (OR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.40, 0.74; p = 0.0001). However, PCA was associated with a higher rate of local recurrence when compared to MIPN (OR: 3.81; 95% CI: 2.45, 5.92; p < 0.00001). Additionally, no significant differences were observed in major complications, estimated glomerular filtration rate decline, creatinine variation, overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and disease-free survival between the two treatment modalities. PCA presents a notable disadvantage regarding local recurrence rates in comparison to MIPN. However, PCA offers several advantages over MIPN, including shorter durations of hospital stay, reduced operative times, and lower complication rates, while achieving similar outcomes in other oncologic metrics.

Percutaneous ablation versus robotic‑assisted partial nephrectomy for cT1 renal cell carcinoma: an evidence-based analysis of comparative outcomes

This investigation sought to conduct a comprehensive meta-analysis to assess the comparative effectiveness and safety of percutaneous ablation (PCA) versus robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) among individuals diagnosed with cT1 renal tumors. This study rigorously followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic search was carried out in the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases, focusing on studies published in English through February 2024. We focused on evaluating primary outcomes, specifically perioperative outcomes, functional outcomes, and oncological outcomes. In this analysis, data from 1534 patients across 13 studies were evaluated. PCA was found to have advantageous outcomes in comparison to RAPN regarding hospital stay durations, with a Weighted Mean Difference (WMD) of - 2.03 days (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: -3.78 to - 0.27; p = 0.02), operative times (WMD: -106.75 min; 95% CI: - 170.78 to - 42.72; p = 0.001), and overall complication rates (Odds Ratio [OR]: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.89; p = 0.01). Conversely, PCA showed a higher incidence of local recurrence compared to RAPN, with an OR of 3.20 (95% CI: 1.91 to 5.35; p < 0.00001). Moreover, there were no statistically significant differences between the two treatments in terms of major complications, declines in estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFR), variations in creatinine levels, overall survival rates, and recurrence-free survival. While PCA exhibits higher local recurrence rates than RAPN, it also presents significant advantages, such as shorter hospital stays, decreased operative durations, and lower complication rates. This juxtaposition underscores the urgent need for further, more rigorous research to substantiate these findings.

Differential efficacy of ablation therapy versus partial nephrectomy between clinical T1a and T1b renal tumors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To assess the differential clinical outcomes of patients treated with partial nephrectomy (PN) vs. those treated with ablation therapy (AT) such as radiofrequency ablation, cryoablation and microwave ablation for cT1b compared to cT1a renal tumors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Multiple databases were searched for articles published before August 2021. Studies were deemed eligible if they compared clinical outcomes in patients who underwent PN with those who underwent AT for cT1a and/or cT1b renal tumors.

RESULTS

Overall, 27 studies comprising 13,996 patients were eligible for this meta-analysis. In both cT1a and cT1b renal tumors, there was no significant difference in the percent decline of estimated glomerular filtration rates or in the overall/severe complication rates between PN and AT. Compared to AT, PN was associated with a lower risk of local recurrence in both patients with cT1a and cT1b tumors (cT1a: pooled risk ratio [RR]; 0.43, 95% confidence intervals [CI]; 0.28-0.66, cT1b: pooled RR; 0.41, 95%CI; 0.23-0.75). Subgroup analyses regarding the technical approach revealed no statistical difference in local recurrence rates between percutaneous AT and PN in patients with cT1a tumors (pooled RR; 0.61, 95%CI; 0.32-1.15). In cT1b, however, PN was associated with a lower risk of local recurrence (pooled RR; 0.45, 95%CI; 0.23-0.88). There was no difference in distant metastasis or cancer mortality rates between PN and AT in patients with cT1a, or cT1b tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

AT has a substantially relevant disadvantage with regards to local recurrence compared to PN, particularly in cT1b renal tumors. Despite the limitations inherent to the nature of retrospective and unmatched primary cohorts, percutaneous AT could be used as a reasonable alternative treatment for well-selected patients with cT1a renal tumors.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Minimally Invasive Partial Nephrectomy Versus Focal Therapy for Small Renal Masses

Background

Minimally invasive partial nephrectomy (MIPN) and focal therapy (FT) are popular trends for small renal masses (SRMs). However, there is currently no systematic comparison between MIPN and FT of SRMs. Therefore, we systematically study the perioperative, renal functional, and oncologic outcomes of MIPN and FT in SRMs.

Methods

We have searched the Embase, Cochrane Library, and PubMed for articles between MIPN (robot-assisted partial nephrectomy and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy) and FT {radiofrequency ablation (RFA), microwave ablation (MWA), cryoablation (CA), irreversible electroporation, non-thermal [irreversible electroporation (IRE)] ablation, and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT)}. We calculated pooled mean difference (MD), odds ratios (ORs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) (CRD42021260787).

Results

A total of 26 articles (n = 4,420) were included in the study. Compared with MIPN, the operating time (OP) of FT had significantly lower (SMD, −1.20; CI, −1.77 to −0.63; I2 = 97.6%, P &lt; 0.0001), estimated blood loss (EBL) of FT had significantly less (SMD, −1.20; CI, −1.77 to −0.63; I2 = 97.6%, P &lt; 0.0001), length of stay (LOS) had shorter (SMD, −0.90; CI, −1.26 to −0.53; I2 = 92.2%, P &lt; 0.0001), and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of FT was significantly lower decrease (SMD, −0.90; CI, −1.26 to −0.53; I2 = 92.2%, P &lt; 0.0001). However, FT possessed lower risk in minor complications (Clavien 1–2) (OR, 0.69; CI, 0.45 to 1.07; I2 = 47%, P = 0.023) and overall complications (OR, 0.71; CI, 0.51 to 0.99; I2 = 49.2%, P = 0.008). Finally, there are no obvious difference between FT and MIPN in local recurrence, distant metastasis, and major complications (P &gt; 0.05).

Conclusion

FT has more advantages in protecting kidney function, reducing bleeding, shortening operating time, and shortening the length of stay. There is no difference in local recurrence, distant metastasis, and major complications. For the minimally invasive era, we need to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of all aspects to make comprehensive choices.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, identifier PROSPERO (CRD42021260787).

Percutaneous thermoablation of small renal masses (T1a) in surgical candidate patients: oncologic outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the local tumour progression-free survival (LTPFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) of healthy surgical candidates who underwent percutaneous thermoablation (TA) as a first-line therapy for small renal masses (T1a).

METHODS

The institutional review board approved this bi-institutional retrospective study of 85 consecutive surgical candidates with 97 biopsy-proven malignant renal masses (T1a) treated with percutaneous TA from 2008 to 2016. The LTPFS, MFS, CSS and OS rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Descriptive analysis was also performed.

RESULTS

The median tumour size was 2.3 cm (range, 0.7-3.9 cm). The minimal and mean follow-up periods were 24 and 56 months, respectively. Local recurrence was detected in four patients (4.7%) at 8.5, 13.8, 58.0 and 64.0 months of follow-up and retreated successfully with percutaneous TA. No patient developed metastatic renal cell carcinoma, and none died due to renal oncologic complications. One patient died of heart attack. The 5-year LTPFS, OS, MFS and CSS rates were 93.0%, 98.4%, 100% and 100%, respectively. Only two patients (2.3%) had major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade > II), including ureteropelvic junction stenosis and urinary obstruction due to ureteral blood clots.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates that percutaneous TA is a feasible and effective first-line therapy for healthy surgical candidates with small renal masses (T1a). The 5-year LTPFS, OS, CSS and MFS rates were 93.0%, 98.4%, 100% and 100%, respectively, with a major complication rate of only 2.3%.

KEY POINTS

• Image-guided percutaneous thermoablation of small renal malignancies was effective in 95.3% of the healthy surgical candidates. • Major complications were detected in 2.3% of the patients. • The local tumour progression-free survival rate was 97.6% and 93.0% at 3 and 5 years, respectively.

Focal therapy versus robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in the management of clinical T1 renal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) and focal therapy (FT) have both been successfully employed in the management of small renal masses. However, despite this being the era of minimally invasive surgery, few comparative studies exist on RPN and FT. The aim of our study is to review perioperative, renal functional and oncologic outcomes of FT and RPN in cT1 renal masses.

METHODS

Literature published in Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases up to April 22, 2018, was systematically searched. We included literature comparing outcomes of FT (radiofrequency ablation, cryoablation, microwave ablation, and irreversible electroporation) and RPN. Studies that reported only on laparoscopic partial nephrectomy or open partial nephrectomy, and review articles, editorials, letters, or cost analyses were excluded. In total, data from 1166 patients were included.

RESULTS

From 858 total articles, 7 nonrandomized, observational studies were included. Compared with RPN, FT was associated with a significantly lower decrease of estimated glomerular filtration rate (weighted mean difference [WMD] -8.06 mL/min/1.73 m; confidence interval [CI] -15.85 to -0.26; P = .04), and lower estimated blood loss (WMD -49.61 mL; CI -60.78 to -38.45; P < .001). However, patients who underwent FT had a significantly increased risk of local recurrence (risk ratio [RR] 9.89; CI 4.24-23.04; P < .001) and distant metastasis (RR 6.42; CI 1.70-24.33; P = .006). However, operative times, lengths of stay, and complication rates were revealed to be similar between FT and RPN.

CONCLUSION

RPN has a substantial advantage in preventing cancer recurrence. However, in the era of minimally invasive surgery, FT has advantages in renal function preservation and less bleeding. Long-term follow-up for survival rates and comparative analysis of microwave ablation and irreversible electroporation are needed to extend FT for patients with significant morbidities and for those who need sufficient renal function preservation with minimal bleeding.

Partial nephrectomy versus ablative techniques for small renal masses: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare partial nephrectomy (PN), radiofrequency ablation (RFA), cryoablation (CRA) and microwave ablation (MWA) regarding oncologic, perioperative and functional outcomes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The MEDLINE, EMBASE and COCHRANE libraries were searched for studies comparing PN, RFA, CRA or MWA and reporting on any-cause or cancer-specific mortality, local recurrence, complications or renal function. Network meta-analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Forty-seven studies with 24,077 patients were included. Patients receiving RFA, CRA or MWA were older and had more comorbidities compared with PN. All-cause mortality was higher for CRA and RFA compared with PN (incidence rate ratio IRR = 2.58, IRR = 2.58, p < 0.001, respectively). No significant differences in cancer-specific mortality were evident. Local recurrence was higher for CRA, RFA and MWA compared with PN (IRR = 4.13, IRR = 1.79, IRR = 2.52, p < 0.05 respectively). A decline in renal function was less pronounced after RFA versus PN, CRA and MWA (mean difference in GFR MD = 6.49; MD = 5.82; MD = 10.89, p < 0.05 respectively).

CONCLUSION

Higher overall survival and local control of PN compared with ablative therapies did not translate into significantly better cancer-specific mortality. Most studies carried a high risk of bias by selecting younger and healthier patients for PN, which may drive superior survival and local control. Physicians should be aware of the lack of high-quality evidence and the potential benefits of ablative techniques for certain patients, including a superior complication profile and renal function preservation.

KEY POINTS

• Patients selected for ablation of small renal masses are older and have more comorbidities compared with those undergoing partial nephrectomy. • Partial nephrectomy yields lower all-cause mortality, which is probably biased by patient selection and does not translate into prolonged cancer-free survival. • The decline of renal function is smallest after radiofrequency ablation for small renal masses.

Determinant factors for chronic kidney disease after partial nephrectomy

The objective of this review is to evaluate the factors that determine the development or deterioration of Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) after partial nephrectomy (PN).

When current literature is reviewed, it is found that factors that influence renal function after partial nephrectomy, are multifactorial. Those are divided into pre-surgical factors, such as hypertension, diabetes mellitus, urolithiasis, obesity, metabolic syndrome among others; intra-surgical factors, like the surgical technique used, the remaining healthy tissue, the experience of the surgeon, the time and type of ischemia among others. Lastly, post-surgical factors, also impose some influence on the post-surgical renal performance.

It was also found that minimally invasive surgery, in addition to its known advantages, seems to offer a greater field of action in the future that will allow more nephrons preservation in any future surgical scenario.

Finally, the current trend is to perform PN on all patients, in whom surgery is technically feasible regardless of the approach used, without risking oncological outcomes, patient safety, and without being exposed to any additional complications.

Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: systematic review of functional results

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Various ischemia type during partial nephrectomy for renal cell cancer (RCC) resulted in different postoperative functional outcomes. Our objective was to systematically review the contemporary literature on robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) and investigate the association of ischemia type and tumor complexity with postoperative functional outcomes of the operated kidney and overall.

RECENT FINDINGS

Forty-five of the 99 reports identified were selected for qualitative analysis. All included studies were observational and nonrandomized. Overall, we found that patients undergoing RPN with zero ischemia and selective artery clamping had a lower decrease in glomerular filtration rates of the operated kidney in comparison to both warm and cold ischemia. This association seems also to play a role in patients with bilateral kidneys harboring complex tumors.

SUMMARY

Zero ischemia and selective artery clamping provide the best functional outcomes following robotic partial nephrectomy. This seems to be of particular relevance in patients with single kidney or tumors of high complexity. Whether these changes are statistically or clinically significant cannot be determined within this systematic review.