Laparoscopic Transperitoneal Radical Nephrectomy for Renal Masses with Level I and II Thrombus

A Novel Technique for Hand-Assisted Laparoscopy in Difficult Nephrectomies-Is One Hand Better Than Two? A Single-Centre, Single-Surgeon Series

Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is the standard of care for T1 renal tumors and nowadays being used for T2 or higher tumors, resulting in higher the conversion rates. To bridge this gap, the hand-assisted laparoscopy (HAL) method was introduced. Even now, in the robotic era, this HAL approach continues to find importance in urology, especially in the most challenging cases, albeit, with a relatively low usage rate due to the cost involved and availability of hand port devices. Here, we report a case series using a novel modification of the HAL nephrectomy (HALN) technique when open conversion is needed. From a prospective database, we retrospectively analyzed the data of Six patients who underwent HALN at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences between January 2019 and December 2022. Indications for surgery included both malignant and benign renal disease. Four surgeries were performed on the right side while two were performed on the left. Five patients underwent a HALN for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and 1 for a benign non-functioning kidney. In our series, all the cases with RCC had were T2a or higher. Our case series shows that HALN is technically safe, effective, and a great adjunct to conventional laparoscopy. The ingenious use of a surgical glove as a hand port is an easy-to-make-and- use device in such challenging surgeries.

Surgical Approach in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Literature Review

The treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma has undergone considerable advances in the last two decades. Cytoreductive nephrectomy and metastasectomy retains a role in patients with a limited metastatic burden. The choice of optimal treatment regimen remains a matter of debate. The article summarises the current role of surgery in metastatic kidney cancer.

Novel Technique for Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Nephrectomy for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma with Renal Vein and Inferior Vena Cava Thrombi: Three Case Reports

Introduction

The treatment of thrombi in the renal vein (RV) and inferior vena cava (IVC) requires advanced laparoscopic experience. We present three cases of hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy (HALN) using a novel technique for treating advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with thrombi in the RV and IVC. Case Presentation. Three patients with RCC with RV or IVC thrombus below level I underwent HALN. Two patients had right RCC with RV and IVC thrombi. One patient had left RCC with an RV thrombus. We hooked a vessel loop to the end of the thrombus and pulled it up manually to make space for vascular processing. The RV was narrowed and dissected using Hem-o-lok clips or an Endo GIA stapler.

Conclusion

In carefully selected cases, renal vascular processing could be easily and safely performed using a vessel loop in HALN with thrombectomy.

Surgical treatment of renal cell carcinoma with inferior vena cava tumor thrombus

PURPOSE

The present report discusses the indications of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) in open nephrectomy and surgical outcomes of conventional and minimally invasive surgical techniques for treating advanced renal cell carcinoma with inferior vena cava tumor thrombus.

METHODS

The present study involved a comprehensive retrieval of pertinent literature from the most recent two decades.

RESULTS

Comparisons between radical nephrectomy procedures in terms of open, laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgeries revealed that open surgery had more blood loss, a longer operation time and higher mortality rates than laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgeries. Furthermore, surgery with CPB was associated with more blood loss than non-CPB surgery. Rates of early and late deaths were much higher in patients with CPB than in those without CPB.

CONCLUSIONS

Different surgical techniques had different indications in terms of levels of inferior vena cava tumor thrombus. The laparoscopic, robotic-assisted, open surgical techniques and CPB with deep hypothermic circulatory arrest were indicated for Levels I, II, III and III-IV inferior vena cava tumor thrombus, respectively. Laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgeries cause less trauma than open surgery but require more complicated equipments to support the procedure. CPB should be avoided in radical nephrectomy whenever possible. The increased application of laparoscopic and robotic techniques in the future is anticipated.

Role of the Laparoscopic Approach for Complex Urologic Surgery in the Era of Robotics

(1) Introduction: The advent of robotic surgery led to the assumption that laparoscopic surgery would be replaced entirely. However, the high costs of robotic surgery limit its availability. The aim of the current study was to assess the feasibility of the 3D laparoscopic approach for the most complex urological procedures. (2) Materials and methods: We included in the current study all patients who had undergone complex 3D laparoscopic procedures in our department since January 2017, including radical nephrectomy (LRN) using a dual combined approach (19 patients), radical nephroureterectomy (LRNU) with bladder cuff excision (13 patients), and radical cystectomy (LRC) with intracorporeal urinary diversion (ICUD) (21 patients). (3) Results: The mean operative time was 345/230/478 min, the complications rate was 26%/30.76%/23.8% and positive surgical margins were encountered in 3/1/1 patients for the combined approach of LRN/LRNU/LRC with ICUD, respectively. A single patient was converted to open surgery during LRN due to extension of the vena cava thrombus above the hepatic veins. After LRC, sepsis was the most common complication and 8 patients were readmitted at a mean of 15.5 days after discharge. (4) Conclusions: In the era of robotic surgery, laparoscopy remains a plausible alternative for most complex oncological cases.

Techniques and outcomes of minimally-invasive surgery for nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma with inferior vena cava thrombosis: a systematic review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Current guidelines recommend considering surgical excision of non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with inferior vena cava (IVC) thrombosis in patients with acceptable performance status. Of note, several authors have pioneered specific techniques for laparoscopic and robotic management of renal cancer with level I-IV IVC thrombosis.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic review of the English-language literature on surgical techniques and perioperative outcomes of minimally-invasive radical nephrectomy (RN) and IVC thrombectomy for nonmetastatic RCC was performed without time filters using the MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science (WoS) databases in September 2018 according to the PRISMA statement recommendations.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Overall, 28 studies were selected for qualitative analysis (N.=13 on laparoscopic surgery, N.=15 on robotic surgery). The quality of evidence according to GRADE was low. Laparoscopic techniques included hand-assisted, hybrid and pure laparoscopic approaches. Most of these series included right-sided tumors with predominantly level I or II IVC thrombi. Similarly, most robotic series reported right-sided RCC with level I-II IVC thrombosis; yet, few authors extended the indication to level III thrombi and to left-sided RCC. Surgical techniques for minimally-invasive IVC thrombectomy evolved over the years, with specific technical nuances aiming to tailor surgical strategy according to both tumor side and thrombus extent. Among the included studies, perioperative outcomes were promising.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally-invasive surgery is technically feasible and has been shown to achieve acceptable perioperative outcomes in selected patients with renal cancer and IVC thrombosis. The evidence is premature to draw conclusions on intermediate-long term oncologic outcomes. Robotic surgery allowed to extend surgical indications to more challenging cases with more extensive tumor thrombosis. Nonetheless, global experience on minimally-invasive IVC thrombectomy is limited to high-volume surgeons at high-volume Centers. Future research is needed to prove its non-inferiority as compared to open surgery and to define its benefits and limits.