Economic burden of repeat renal surgery on solitary kidney--do the ends justify the means? A cost analysis

Comparative analysis of salvage partial nephrectomy versus radical nephrectomy after the failure of initial partial nephrectomy

OBJECTIVES

To compare the oncologic outcomes and renal function discrepancy of salvage partial nephrectomy (sPN) and salvage radical nephrectomy (sRN) after an initial failed PN.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective data from multiple centers between 2008 and 2022 were analyzed in this study. Patients who received sPN or sRN after an initial failed PN were identified. Comparative analysis and propensity score matching (PSM) was performed and the RENAL score, tumor size, and pathological T stage at salvage surgery were used to match the 2 groups. Local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were assessed using the Cox proportional hazards model and log-rank tests. Renal function after salvage surgery was assessed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test.

RESULTS

A total of 140 patients who underwent salvage surgery were evaluated, of whom 60 were considered for PSM analysis after matching. At a median follow-up of 27.0 months, LRFS and RFS showed no significant difference between sPN and sRN, either before (LRFS, HR = 0.673 [95% CI: 0.171-2.644], P = 0.610; RFS, HR = 0.744 [95% CI: 0.271-1.344], P = 0.595) or after matching (LRFS, HR = 1.080 [95% CI: 0.067-17.30], P = 0.957; RFS, HR = 1.199 [95% CI: 0.241-5.983], P = 0.822). During long-term follow-up, sPN preserved renal function (after matching, eGFR, 71.4 vs. 54.0, P < 0.001) and prevented eGFR loss (after matching: 6.6% vs. 25.6%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Salvage partial nephrectomy offers a better alternative than sRN for recurrence after initial PN, as sPN preserves renal function better while maintaining parallel tumor control and acceptable complication rates.

A 25 year perspective on the evolution and advances in an understanding of the biology, evaluation and treatment of kidney cancer

The diagnosis, evaluation and management of patients with renal cell carcinoma has transformed in the 21st century. Utilizing biological discoveries and technological advances, the field has moved from blunt surgical and largely ineffective medical treatments, to nuanced and fine-tuned approaches based on biology, extent of disease and patient preferences. In this review we will summarize the last 25 years of progress in kidney cancer.

Extracorporeal Partial Nephrectomy with Orthotopic Autotransplantation under Pharmaco-Cold Ischaemia for Cancer of a Single Kidney: A Case Report

Up to 10% of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) have locally advanced disease with venous tumour thrombosis involving the inferior vena cava (IVC). 30–50% of them present with synchronous metastatic disease. Surgical treatment remains the only potentially radical method for patients suffering from RCC and IVC tumour thrombosis without distant metastases. Five-year cancer-specific survival for such patients is 40–60%. The role of surgery in the treatment of RCC is significant, even if only cytoreductive operation is possible. Nephron-sparing surgery (NSS) is reasonably preferable for patients suffering from single kidney RCC, but it is not always radical enough. Extracorporeal approach allows to perform a radical dissection of the tumour in special complicated cases, but it is seldom used because of technical difficulties. We present a case of successful NSS by extracorporeal approach in our modification for RCC with IVC tumour thrombosis.

Clinical outcomes of repeat partial nephrectomy compared to initial partial nephrectomy of a solitary kidney

BACKGROUND

When local recurrence of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) occurs after nephron-sparing surgery (NSS) on the ipsilateral side, some surgeons hesitate to perform reoperative surgery because of possible difficulties. We aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of repeat partial nephrectomy (RePN) compared with those of initial partial nephrectomy (iPN) for RCC of a solitary kidney.

METHODS

Until September 2017, 1671 patients with renal tumors underwent NSS. Of these, 79 patients who underwent NSS for sporadic RCC of a solitary kidney were included. Parameters were compared using the Mann-Whitney U, Pearson Chi-square, and Fisher exact tests.

RESULTS

Eleven patients underwent RePN and 68 underwent iPN. The RePN group had a relatively smaller tumor size (p = 0.0432), longer operative time (p = 0.0432), and higher estimated blood loss (p = 0.0002) than the iPN group. No significant differences in the other clinical factors were found between the groups. The rates of perioperative complications greater than Clavien-Dindo grade II were 18.2% and 17.6% in the RePN group and iPN group, respectively. The mean decreasing rate of estimated glomerular filtration rate was not different between the groups at 3 and 6 months postoperatively. No significant differences were found in hemodialysis-free survival (p = 0.7392) and intrarenal recurrence-free survival (p = 0.4924) between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical outcomes of RePN were not significantly different compared with those of iPN for patients with sporadic RCC of a solitary kidney. RePN is technically feasible with acceptable complication and local recurrence rates with better postoperative kidney function.

Multiplex Partial Nephrectomy, Repeat Partial Nephrectomy, and Salvage Partial Nephrectomy Remain the Primary Treatment in Multifocal and Hereditary Kidney Cancer

The standard of care treatment for solitary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) tumors 4 cm or less is partial nephrectomy (PNx). However, multifocal kidney cancer presents unique challenges for treating physicians. Historically, total nephrectomy and hemodialysis with possible renal transplant later was the primary therapeutic strategy for these patients. Later, as nephron sparing surgical approaches improved, PNx became the standard of care for patients presenting with multifocal and hereditary RCC. Surgeries to remove multiple renal tumors simultaneously produce different perioperative outcomes and increased risk of complications. Due to these differences in technique and outcomes, the term multiplex partial nephrectomy (MxPNx) has been coined to designate these differences. Here, we discuss the role that MxPNx continues to play in multifocal RCC.

Nephron-sparing surgery for multifocal and hereditary renal tumors

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite the controversy surrounding the benefits of nephron-sparing surgery, multiple absolute indications for nephron-sparing surgery still exist, including the classic indications of hereditary and bilateral kidney tumors.

RECENT FINDINGS

Multiple genetic mutations have been identified which lead to hereditary kidney cancer conditions. These are briefly reviewed because the surgical management of hereditary kidney tumors depends on the genetic and histologic subtypes involved. Clear understanding of these hereditary conditions is crucial for proper surgical management of these tumors.

SUMMARY

Complex partial nephrectomy for multiple renal tumors, or multiplex partial nephrectomy, requires not only exceptional surgical skills but expertise of numerous nonsurgical methodologies, such as hands-on intraoperative ultrasonography and interpretation of multiple imaging modalities. In addition, multidisciplinary management is crucial for optimal outcomes in patient care. This review evaluates the most advanced surgical techniques and perioperative management required to successfully care for these challenging cases.