Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes After Laparoscopic and Robotic Tumor Enucleation for Renal Cell Carcinoma

Resection Techniques During Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review

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.

Imaging Features of Renal Masses to Select Optimal Candidates for Tumor Enucleation Partial Nephrectomy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The goal of this paper was to critically evaluate preoperative findings that optimally select candidates for renal tumor enucleation partial nephrectomy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Tumor enucleation has been widely accepted as a management option for patients with chronic kidney disease, hereditary renal cell carcinoma, or multifocal disease. Recent evidence suggests safety and efficacy in the management of routine small renal masses. With recent advances in imaging, the literature for ruling out aggressive renal cell carcinoma and selection for tumor enucleation is robust. As the incidence of renal cell carcinoma rises, partial nephrectomy continues to be the mainstay of treatment for localized renal cell carcinoma. Tumor enucleation maximizes preservation of renal parenchyma without hindering oncologic outcomes. It is important to recognize key tumor radiologic findings which urologists may use to optimize patient selection for tumor enucleation.

Predictors of Positive Surgical Margins after Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy for Localized Renal Tumors: Insights from a Large Multicenter International Prospective Observational Project (The Surface-Intermediate-Base Margin Score Consortium)

Background: To explore predictors of positive surgical margins (PSM) after robotic partial nephrectomy (PN) in a large multicenter international observational project, harnessing the Surface-Intermediate-Base (SIB) margin score to report the resection technique after PN in a standardized way. Methods: Data from consecutive patients with cT1-2N0M0 renal masses treated with PN from September 2014 to March 2015 at 16 tertiary referral centers and included in the SIB margin score International Consortium were prospectively collected. For the present study, only patients treated with robotic PN were included. Uni- and multivariable analysis were fitted to explore clinical and surgical predictors of PSMs after PN. Results: Overall, 289 patients were enrolled. Median (IQR) preoperative tumor size was 3.0 (2.3−4.2) cm and median (IQR) PADUA score was 8 (7−9). SIB scores of 0−2 (enucleation), 3−4 (enucleoresection) and 5 (resection) were reported in 53.3%, 27.3% and 19.4% of cases, respectively. A PSM was recorded in 18 (6.2%) patients. PSM rate was 4.5%, 11.4% and 3.6% in case of enucleation, enucleoresection and resection, respectively. Patients with PSMs had tumors with a higher rate of contact with the urinary collecting system (55.6% vs. 27.3%; p < 0.001) and a longer median warm ischemia time (22 vs. 16 min; p = 0.02) compared with patients with negative surgical margins, while no differences emerged between the two groups in terms of other tumor features (i.e., pathological diameter, PADUA score). In multivariable analysis, only enucleoresection (SIB score 3−4) versus enucleation (SIB score 0−2) was found to be an independent predictor of PSM at final pathology (HR: 2.68; 95% CI: 1.25−7.63; p = 0.04), while resection (SIB score 5) was not. Conclusions: In our experience, enucleoresection led to a higher risk of PSMs as compared to enucleation. Further studies are needed to assess the differential impacts of resection technique and surgeon’s experience on margin status after robotic PN.

Parenchymal Mass Loss During Partial Nephrectomy: Role of Devascularized Parenchymal Mass and Excised Parenchymal Mass and Impact on Functional Preservation

This study included 93 patients with renal masses who underwent standard partial nephrectomy or tumor enucleation. After surgery, parenchymal mass loss caused by devascularization resulted in more damage to renal function than excised parenchymal mass loss. Surgeons should seek better techniques to decrease devascularization during reconstruction.

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the importance of devascularized parenchymal mass(DPM) and excised parenchymal mass(EPM) in functional preservation after standard partial nephrectomy(SPN).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-one patients who underwent pure tumor enucleation(TE) and 52 patients who underwent SPN with necessary data were included. As no EPM was lost in TE, the TE samples were used to estimate the degree of volume shrinkage that occurred when the measurements were performed in vivo with blood flow versus ex vivo without, and the shrinkage ratio was calculated as specimen volume divided by tumor volume in vivo. In SPN, the specimen volume comprised tumor volume plus EPM. The EPM was calculated as specimen volume divided by shrinkage ratio minus tumor volume in vivo. The DPM was defined as total ipsilateral parenchymal mass loss minus EPM. T tests, χ² test, and Mann-Whitney U tests were employed to compare clinical characteristics. Multivariate analysis was used to identify variables that correlated with glomerular filtration rate(GFR) preservation.

RESULTS

The mean sizes of devascularized and excised parenchymal masses were 13.6 cm³ and 5.2 cm³ (P = .01), which accounted for 7.8% and 3.4% of preoperative ipsilateral parenchymal mass (P = .03) in SPN, respectively. The shrinkage ratio was 0.71 and correlation coefficient was 0.965. After stepwise regression, DPM, and preoperative GFR were significantly associated with global GFR preservation.

CONCLUSION

The DPM comprises most of parenchymal mass loss after SPN and plays a more important role than EPM on functional outcomes. Surgeons should pay more attention to reducing devascularization during partial nephrectomy.

Comparison between minimally-invasive partial and radical nephrectomy for the treatment of clinical T2 renal masses: results of a 10-year study in a tertiary care center

BACKGROUND

Even if partial nephrectomy (PN) is nowadays considered the standard for managing cT1 renal masses, its role in the management of cT2 kidney tumors is controversial. We aimed to compare oncologic and functional outcomes of minimally invasive radical nephrectomy (RN) and PN in cT2 renal masses.

METHODS

Patients with cT2 renal masses underwent minimally-invasive PN or RN performed by a highly experienced single surgeon from 2009 to 2019 were considered. Demographic, perioperative and functional variables were compared. Cumulative incidence plot and competing risks regression (CRR) models were used to test differences in 5-year cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and 5-year other-cause mortality (OCM) rates. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression model was used to test differences in 5-year progression free survival (PFS) rates.

RESULTS

Overall, 52 PN vs. 64 RN patients were identified. Relative to RN, PN patients recorded higher rates of complications (25% vs. 7.8%, P=0.02) but lower upstaging rate (≥pT3a 64.1% vs. 19.2%, P<0.0001). Functional outcomes were in favor of PN (all P<0.001). No differences were recorded between 5-year CSM and OCM according to nephrectomy type. At CRR models, older age and upstaging were independent predictors of 5-year OCM and CSM, respectively (all P<0.01). Finally, only upstaging, high grade tumors and presence of positive surgical margins were identified as independent predictors of 5-year PFS (all P<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In experienced hands the treatment of cT2 renal neoplasms with minimally-invasive PN is feasible, providing perioperative and oncological safety profiles comparable to RN, with advantages in terms of functional outcomes.