1
|
Shi X, Yu Y, Ye T, Yu G, Xu B, Zhang Z, Wang S, Liu Z, Chen K, Wang S, Li H. Initial Experience with Hybrid Partial Nephrectomy with Ultrasound-guided Balloon Catheter Occlusion of the Renal Artery for Recurrent Renal Tumors. EUR UROL SUPPL 2024; 60:47-53. [PMID: 38333046 PMCID: PMC10850398 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2024.01.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 01/03/2024] [Indexed: 02/10/2024] Open
Abstract
Repeat partial nephrectomy (PN) is an effective treatment in improving the prognosis for patients with recurrent renal cancer after initial PN. However, salvage PN (sPN) is inevitably associated with a higher rate of complications, largely because of intraperitoneal adhesions and fibrosis. Here we describe three initial cases for which recurrent renal tumors were treated with a novel minimally invasive approach, namely Ultrasound-guided Renal Artery Balloon catheter Occluded Hybrid Partial Nephrectomy (UBo-HPN).With laparoscopic ultrasound (LUS) guiding a Fogarty catheter to occlude the arterial blood supply, dissection of the renal hilum and most of the abdominal cavity can be avoided. UBo-HPN was successfully performed in three patients. One case of postoperative fever (Clavien-Dindo grade II) occurred, with no other complications. The mean operative time was 106 min, with a mean warm ischemia time of 21 min. UBo-HPN may be considered a safe and effective alternative for sPN, with a minimally invasive surgical footprint and better surgical outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xu Shi
- Department of Urology, Tongji Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Yang Yu
- Department of Ultrasound, Tongji Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Tianrun Ye
- Department of Urology, Tongji Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
- Institute of Urology of Hubei Province, Wuhan, China
| | - Gan Yu
- Department of Urology, Tongji Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
- Institute of Urology of Hubei Province, Wuhan, China
| | - Bin Xu
- Department of Urology, Guizhou Provincial People’s Hospital, Guiyang, China
| | - Zongbiao Zhang
- Department of Urology, Tongji Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
- Institute of Urology of Hubei Province, Wuhan, China
| | - Shen Wang
- Department of Urology, Tongji Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
- Institute of Urology of Hubei Province, Wuhan, China
| | - Zheng Liu
- Department of Urology, Tongji Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
- Institute of Urology of Hubei Province, Wuhan, China
| | - Ke Chen
- Department of Urology, Tongji Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
- Institute of Urology of Hubei Province, Wuhan, China
| | - Shaogang Wang
- Department of Urology, Tongji Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
- Institute of Urology of Hubei Province, Wuhan, China
| | - Heng Li
- Department of Urology, Tongji Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
- Institute of Urology of Hubei Province, Wuhan, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Abdelsalam ME, Hudspeth TN, Leonards L, Kusin SB, Buckley JR, Bassett R, Awad A, Karam JA, Matin SF, Lu T, Ahrar K. Effectiveness of Thermal Ablation for Renal Cell Carcinoma after Prior Partial Nephrectomy. EUR UROL SUPPL 2023; 57:45-50. [PMID: 38020520 PMCID: PMC10658406 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.08.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/09/2023] [Indexed: 12/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Repeat partial nephrectomy (PN) for tumors recurring in the ipsilateral kidney is associated with surgical complexity and a higher rate of complications. Objective To evaluate the local oncologic efficacy of thermal ablation (TA) for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the ipsilateral kidney following PN. Design setting participation We included patients who underwent ablation for renal tumors in the ipsilateral kidney after PN between January 2005 and December 2019. Demographics, tumor size, procedural details, complications, pathology, local oncologic outcomes, and survival outcomes are described. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis The procedural, pathologic, and oncologic outcomes are described. Survival rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results and limitations A total of 66 patients (46 male and 20 female) with a median age of 62 yr (interquartile range [IQR] 52-69) met our inclusion criteria. In these patients, 74 TA procedures were performed for 86 lesions (median tumor size 1.9 cm, IQR 1.6-2.5). Radiofrequency ablation and cryoablation accounted for 60 (81%) and 14 (19%) procedures, respectively. Three patients (3.7%) had Clavien-Dindo grade III complications. Of 65 lesion biopsies, 62 (95.5%) were diagnostic. The most common subtype was clear cell RCC (n = 37). The median imaging follow-up duration was 60 mo (IQR 43-88). Recurrence in the ablation zone occurred for four lesions (4.6%) at a median of 6.9 mo (IQR 6.4-10.7). The rates of overall, recurrence-free, and disease-free survival were 93.1%, 94.4%, and 65.6% at 5 yr, and 71.6%, 94.4%, and 60.1% at 10 yr, respectively. Limitations include the retrospective design and the lack of a control group. Conclusions TA is effective for the treatment of RCC in the ipsilateral kidney following PN. Patient summary Heat treatment to remove tumor tissue is an effective option for small kidney masses recurring after partial kidney removal for cancer. Long-term follow-up data revealed that this treatment resulted in low recurrence and complication rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mohamed E. Abdelsalam
- Department of Interventional Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Tessa N. Hudspeth
- Department of Radiology, Texas Radiology Associates, LLP, Plano, TX, USA
| | - Laura Leonards
- Department of Radiology, North Oaks Medical Center, Hammond, LA, USA
| | - Samuel B. Kusin
- University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | | | - Roland Bassett
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Ahmed Awad
- Department of Interventional Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jose A. Karam
- University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Surena F. Matin
- Department of Urology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Thomas Lu
- Department of Interventional Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Kamran Ahrar
- Department of Interventional Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Di Maida F, Grosso AA, Campi R, Lambertini L, Gallo ML, Cadenar A, Salamone V, Coco S, Paganelli D, Tuccio A, Masieri L, Minervini A. Redo Partial Nephrectomy for Local Recurrence After Previous Nephron-sparing Surgery. Surgical Insights and Oncologic Results from a High-volume Robotic Center. EUR UROL SUPPL 2023; 57:84-90. [PMID: 37810278 PMCID: PMC10551832 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.09.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/07/2023] [Indexed: 10/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Background The role of redo partial nephrectomy (PN) for recurrent renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is still overlooked. Objective To report our experience of salvage PN for local recurrence after previous nephron-sparing surgery (NSS). Design setting and participants We prospectively gathered data from patients treated with robotic redo PN for locally recurrent RCC after previous NSS from January 2017 to January 2023. The type of surgical resection technique was assigned to the pathologic specimen according to the surface-intermediate-base (SIB) score. Surgical procedure Redo PN was performed by using the Si Da Vinci robotic platform. Measurements Operative time, warm ischemia time, and intra- and postoperative complications were recorded. The severity of postoperative complications and tumor stage were evaluated. Results and limitations Overall, 26 patients entered the study. The median clinical diameter was 3.5 (interquartile range [IQR] 2.2-4.9) cm and the median Preoperative Aspects and Dimensions Used for an Anatomical (PADUA) score was 8 (IQR 7-9). In 14 (53.8%) cases, recurrence was at the level of previous tumor resection bed. The median operative time was 177 (IQR 148-200) min, and hilar clamping was performed in 14 (53.8%) cases with a median warm ischemia time of 16 (14.5-22) min. Pure enucleation (SIB score 0-1), hybrid enucleation (SIB score 2), and pure enucleoresection (SIB score 3) were recorded in 13 (50%), eight (30.8%), and five (19.2%) cases, respectively. The totality of recurrent RCC far from previous tumor resection bed received a SIB score of 0-1, while in 57.1% and 35.8% of recurrent RCC on previous tumor resection a hybrid enucleation and a pure enucleoresection were performed, respectively. At a median follow-up of 37 (IQR 16-45) mo, five (19%) patients experienced disease recurrence, being local and systemic in three (11.5%) and two (7.7%) patients, respectively. Conclusions Our study highlights the feasibility and safety of redo PN for the treatment of locally recurrent RCCs after NSS, either on previous tumor resection bed or elsewhere in the kidney. Patient summary Robotic redo partial nephrectomy is a challenging procedure. The surgeon needs to tailor the surgical strategy and tumor resection technique case by case, given the heterogeneity of clinical scenarios and the need to achieve maximal functional preservation while ensuring oncologic efficacy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fabrizio Di Maida
- Unit of Oncologic Minimally Invasive Urology and Andrology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Antonio Andrea Grosso
- Unit of Oncologic Minimally Invasive Urology and Andrology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Riccardo Campi
- Unit of Urological Robotic Surgery and Renal Transplantation, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Luca Lambertini
- Unit of Oncologic Minimally Invasive Urology and Andrology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Maria Lucia Gallo
- Unit of Urological Robotic Surgery and Renal Transplantation, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Anna Cadenar
- Unit of Oncologic Minimally Invasive Urology and Andrology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Vincenzo Salamone
- Unit of Oncologic Minimally Invasive Urology and Andrology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Simone Coco
- Unit of Oncologic Minimally Invasive Urology and Andrology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Daniele Paganelli
- Unit of Oncologic Minimally Invasive Urology and Andrology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Agostino Tuccio
- Unit of Oncologic Minimally Invasive Urology and Andrology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Lorenzo Masieri
- Unit of Urological Robotic Surgery and Renal Transplantation, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Andrea Minervini
- Unit of Oncologic Minimally Invasive Urology and Andrology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bertolo R, Pecoraro A, Carbonara U, Amparore D, Diana P, Muselaers S, Marchioni M, Mir MC, Antonelli A, Badani K, Breda A, Challacombe B, Kaouk J, Mottrie A, Porpiglia F, Porter J, Minervini A, Campi R. Resection Techniques During Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review. EUR UROL SUPPL 2023; 52:7-21. [PMID: 37182118 PMCID: PMC10172691 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.03.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/21/2023] [Indexed: 05/16/2023] Open
Abstract
Context The resection technique used to excise tumor during robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) is of paramount importance in achieving optimal clinical outcomes. Objective To provide an overview of the different resection techniques used during RPN, and a pooled analysis of comparative studies. Evidence acquisition The systematic review was conducted according to established principles (PROSPERO: CRD42022371640) on November 7, 2022. A population (P: adult patients undergoing RPN), intervention (I: enucleation), comparator (C: enucleoresection or wedge resection), outcome (O: outcome measurements of interest), and study design (S) framework was prespecified to assess study eligibility. Studies reporting a detailed description of resection techniques and/or evaluating the impact of resection technique on outcomes of surgery were included. Evidence synthesis Resection techniques used during RPN can be broadly classified as resection (non-anatomic) or enucleation (anatomic). A standardized definition for these is lacking. Out of 20 studies retrieved, nine compared "standard" resection versus enucleation. A pooled analysis did not reveal significant differences in terms of operative time, ischemia time, blood loss, transfusions, or positive margins. Significant differences favoring enucleation were found for clamping management (odds ratio [OR] for renal artery clamping 3.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-10.88; p = 0.03), overall complications (OR for occurrence 0.55, 95% CI 0.34-0.87; p = 0.01) major complications (OR for occurrence 0.39, 95% CI 0.19-0.79; p = 0.009), length of stay (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.72 d, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.45; p < 0.001), and decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate (WMD -2.64 ml/min, 95% CI -5.15 to -0.12; p = 0.04). Conclusions There is heterogeneity in the reporting of resection techniques used during RPN. The urological community must improve the quality of reporting and research produced accordingly. Positive margins are not specifically related to the resection technique. Focusing on studies comparing standard resection versus enucleation, advantages with tumor enucleation in terms of avoidance of artery clamping, overall/major complications, length of stay, and renal function were found. These data should be considered when planning the RPN resection strategy. Patient summary We reviewed studies on robotic surgery for partial kidney removal using different techniques to cut away the kidney tumor. We found that a technique called "enucleation" was associated with similar cancer control outcomes in comparison to the standard technique and had fewer complications, better kidney function after surgery, and a shorter hospital stay.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Alessio Pecoraro
- Unit of Urological Robotic Surgery and Renal Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Umberto Carbonara
- Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation-Urology, Unit of Andrology and Kidney Transplantation, University of Bari, Bari, Italy
| | - Daniele Amparore
- Division of Urology, Department of Oncology, School of Medicine, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, University of Turin, Orbassano, Turin, Italy
| | - Pietro Diana
- Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Institute IRCCS, Rozzano, Italy
| | - Stijn Muselaers
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Michele Marchioni
- Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, Laboratory of Biostatistics, G. D’Annunzio Chieti-Pescara University, Chieti, Italy
- Department of Urology, SS Annunziata Hospital, G. D’Annunzio Chieti-Pescara University, Chieti, Italy
| | - Maria Carmen Mir
- Servicio de Urología, Fundación Investigación Hospital IMED Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Alessandro Antonelli
- Department of Urology, University of Verona, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata, Verona, Italy
| | - Ketan Badani
- Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| | - Alberto Breda
- Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Ben Challacombe
- Department of Urology, Guy’s and St. Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Jihad Kaouk
- Glickman Urological & Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Alexandre Mottrie
- Orsi Academy, Melle, Belgium
- Department of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouw Ziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium
| | - Francesco Porpiglia
- Division of Urology, Department of Oncology, School of Medicine, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, University of Turin, Orbassano, Turin, Italy
| | - Jim Porter
- Swedish Urology Group, Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Andrea Minervini
- Unit of Urological Robotic Surgery and Renal Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Riccardo Campi
- Unit of Urological Robotic Surgery and Renal Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Gaas MY, Kaprin AD, Vorobyev NV, Rapoport LM, Korolev DO, Kalpinsky AS. Markers of local kidney cancer recurrence: A surgeon's mistake or a pattern? Review. Urologia 2022:3915603221140964. [PMID: 36515572 DOI: 10.1177/03915603221140964] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
The influence of various morphological, anatomical, genetic and other factors on the local recurrence-free survival of patients who have undergone different renal cell cancer (RCC) treatment is still a rather complex, ambiguous and controversial issue for practicing oncourologists. This review evaluates the effect of several factors on both recurrence-free survival and local recurrence-free survival. The review includes articles, clinical cases, literature reviews, and meta-analyses highlighting the analysis of independent and interrelated predisposing factors for developing local recurrence of RCC from 1984 to 2020. The PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched in English, Spanish, and German. A review of the literature showed the role of the following indices in the local recurrence RCC: microvascular invasion (p = 0.001), tumor necrosis (p = 0.0001), high malignancy (Fuhrman III or IV) (HR = 38.3, 95% CI 3.1-467, p = 0.004) as histological factors, tumor size as an anatomical factor. Thus, the authors state that every centimeter of the tumor increases the risk of local recurrence (p < 0.05). A group from the Mayo Clinic showed the equivalence of different treatment methods in local RCC recurrence. Thus, in the group of patients with cT1a stage kidney cancer, the 5-year local recurrence-free survival rates were 97.7% (96.7-98.6), 95.9% (92.3-99.6), and 95.9% (92.3-99.6) for renal resection, RFA, and cryoablation, respectively. Surgical margin status is the most studied and controversial marker of local renal cell carcinoma recurrence. Researchers found a direct effect of PSM on the risk of local RCC recurrence (p < 0.01). The personalized approach with the search and evaluation of predisposing factors for the local recurrence, as well as further selection of the most optimal treatment, will allow oncourologists to improve both the effectiveness of primary treatment and the recurrence-free survival of patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Margarita Y Gaas
- Department Urology and Operative Nephrology with the Course of Oncourology of Medical Institute of Peoples' Friendship University of Russia, Moscow, Russian Federation
| | - Andrey D Kaprin
- Department Urology and Operative Nephrology with the Course of Oncourology of Medical Institute of Peoples' Friendship University of Russia, Moscow, Russian Federation
| | - Nikolay V Vorobyev
- Department of Oncology, Radiotherapy and Plastic Surgery of I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russian Federation.,P.A. Hertsen Moscow Oncology Research Center, A Branch of FSBI NMRRC of the Ministry of Health of Russia, Moscow, Russian Federation
| | - Leonid M Rapoport
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russian Federation
| | - Dmitry O Korolev
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russian Federation
| | - Alexey S Kalpinsky
- Department of Tumors of the Reproductive and Urinary Organs, Moscow Research Oncological Institute, P. A. Herzen, Branch of the Federal State Budgetary Institution "National Research Center of Radiology," Moscow, Russian Federation
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
García-Perdomo HA, Caparrós MJR, Asensio AA, Cabo AV. Effect of positive surgical margins in patients who undergo a partial nephrectomy regarding recurrence, overall survival, recurrence/progression-free survival, and metastasis-free survival. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2022; 20:459-472. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2022.05.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/23/2022] [Accepted: 05/29/2022] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
|
7
|
Carbonara U, Amparore D, Gentile C, Bertolo R, Erdem S, Ingels A, Marchioni M, Muselaers CH, Kara O, Marandino L, Pavan N, Roussel E, Pecoraro A, Crocerossa F, Torre G, Campi R, Ditonno P. Current strategies to diagnose and manage of positive surgical margins and local recurrence after partial nephrectomy. Asian J Urol 2022; 9:227-242. [PMID: 36035342 PMCID: PMC9399527 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajur.2022.06.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2022] [Revised: 04/05/2022] [Accepted: 04/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective No standard strategy for diagnosis and management of positive surgical margin (PSM) and local recurrence after partial nephrectomy (PN) are reported in literature. This review aims to provide an overview of the current strategies and further perspectives on this patient setting. Methods A non-systematic review of the literature was completed. The research included the most updated articles (about the last 10 years). Results Techniques for diagnosing PSMs during PN include intraoperative frozen section, imprinting cytology, and other specific tools. No clear evidence is reported about these methods. Regarding PSM management, active surveillance with a combination of imaging and laboratory evaluation is the first option line followed by surgery. Regarding local recurrence management, surgery is the primary curative approach when possible but it may be technically difficult due to anatomy resultant from previous PN. In this scenario, thermal ablation (TA) may have the potential to circumvent these limitations representing a less invasive alternative. Salvage surgery represents a valid option; six studies analyzed the outcomes of nephrectomy on local recurrence after PN with three of these focused on robotic approach. Overall, complication rates of salvage surgery are higher compared to TA but ablation presents a higher recurrence rate up to 25% of cases that can often be managed with repeat ablation. Conclusion Controversy still exists surrounding the best strategy for management and diagnosis of patients with PSMs or local recurrence after PN. Active surveillance is likely to be the optimal first-line management option for most patients with PSMs. Ablation and salvage surgery both represent valid options in patients with local recurrence after PN. Conversely, salvage PN and radical nephrectomy have fewer recurrences but are associated with a higher complication rate compared to TA. In this scenario, robotic surgery plays an important role in improving salvage PN and radical nephrectomy outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Umberto Carbonara
- European Association of Urology (EAU), Young Academic Urologists (YAU), Renal Cancer Working Group
- Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation-Urology, Andrology and Kidney Transplantation Unit, University of Bari, Bari, Italy
- Corresponding author. Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation-Urology, Andrology and Kidney Transplantation Unit, University of Bari, Bari, Italy.
| | - Daniele Amparore
- European Association of Urology (EAU), Young Academic Urologists (YAU), Renal Cancer Working Group
- Division of Urology, Department of Oncology, School of Medicine, San Luigi Hospital, University of Turin, Orbassano, Turin, Italy
| | - Cosimo Gentile
- Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation-Urology, Andrology and Kidney Transplantation Unit, University of Bari, Bari, Italy
| | - Riccardo Bertolo
- European Association of Urology (EAU), Young Academic Urologists (YAU), Renal Cancer Working Group
- Department of Urology, San Carlo Di Nancy Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Selcuk Erdem
- European Association of Urology (EAU), Young Academic Urologists (YAU), Renal Cancer Working Group
- Division of Urologic Oncology, Department of Urology, Istanbul University Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Alexandre Ingels
- European Association of Urology (EAU), Young Academic Urologists (YAU), Renal Cancer Working Group
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Henri Mondor, APHP, Créteil, France
| | - Michele Marchioni
- European Association of Urology (EAU), Young Academic Urologists (YAU), Renal Cancer Working Group
- Department of Urology, SS Annunziata Hospital, "G. D'Annunzio" University of Chieti, Chieti, Italy
| | - Constantijn H.J. Muselaers
- European Association of Urology (EAU), Young Academic Urologists (YAU), Renal Cancer Working Group
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Onder Kara
- European Association of Urology (EAU), Young Academic Urologists (YAU), Renal Cancer Working Group
- Department of Urology, Kocaeli University School of Medicine, Kocaeli, Turkey
| | - Laura Marandino
- European Association of Urology (EAU), Young Academic Urologists (YAU), Renal Cancer Working Group
- Department of Medical Oncology, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Nicola Pavan
- European Association of Urology (EAU), Young Academic Urologists (YAU), Renal Cancer Working Group
- Urology Clinic, Department of Medical, Surgical and Health Science, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy
| | - Eduard Roussel
- European Association of Urology (EAU), Young Academic Urologists (YAU), Renal Cancer Working Group
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Angela Pecoraro
- European Association of Urology (EAU), Young Academic Urologists (YAU), Renal Cancer Working Group
- Division of Urology, Department of Oncology, School of Medicine, San Luigi Hospital, University of Turin, Orbassano, Turin, Italy
| | - Fabio Crocerossa
- Department of Urology, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Torre
- Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation-Urology, Andrology and Kidney Transplantation Unit, University of Bari, Bari, Italy
| | - Riccardo Campi
- European Association of Urology (EAU), Young Academic Urologists (YAU), Renal Cancer Working Group
- Unit of Urological Robotic Surgery and Renal Transplantation, University of Florence, Careggi Hospital, Florence, Italy
| | - Pasquale Ditonno
- Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation-Urology, Andrology and Kidney Transplantation Unit, University of Bari, Bari, Italy
| |
Collapse
|