Outcomes of Laparoscopic and Robotic Partial Nephrectomy for Large (>4 Cm) Kidney Tumors

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Nicola Pavan, Ithaar H. Derweesh, Carme Maria Mir, Giacomo Novara, Lance J. Hampton, Matteo Ferro, Sisto Perdonà, Dipen J. Parekh, Francesco Porpiglia, Riccardo Autorino

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of minimally invasive (laparoscopic and robotic) partial nephrectomy (MIPN) for large renal masses. Materials and Methods: A systematic literature review was performed up to September 2016 using multiple search engines to identify studies comparing MIPN for tumors larger than 4 cm (>cT1a) with MIPN for tumors smaller than 4 cm (cT1a). The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) criteria were used for article selection. Baseline demographics and surgical, functional, and oncological parameters were extracted from the included studies whenever available. An overall analysis including all studies was performed, then sensitivity analyses were performed for studies on laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (PN) only, and, finally, for studies on robotic PN only. Results: Overall, 13 case-control studies comparing the outcomes of PN in tumors <4 cm (n = 4441) with those of PN for tumors >4 cm (n = 1024) were included. Warm ischemia time was shorter for the <4 cm group [weighted mean difference (WMD) 3.75 min; 95% confidence interval (CI) −6.4 to −0.7; p = 0.01] and the odds of perioperative complications was lower [odds ratio (OR) 0.62; 95% CI 0.5–0.8; p < 0.001]. There were no significant differences in terms of postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (WMD 4.2 ml/min; 95% CI 0.45–8.97; p = 0.08), as well as onset of postoperative chronic kidney disease (risk ratio 0.71; 95% CI 0.48–1.04; p = 0.08). In addition, no difference was found in the likelihood of positive surgical margins (OR 0.74; 95% CI 0.43–1.28; p = 0.29). Conclusions: MIPN represents a viable treatment option for renal masses larger than 4 cm (higher than cT1a) as it offers good functional outcomes, without increased risk of positive surgical margins. An increased rate of complications should be taken into account when approaching these tumors.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-9
Number of pages9
JournalAnnals of Surgical Oncology
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2017

Fingerprint

Robotics
Nephrectomy
Meta-Analysis
Confidence Intervals
Kidney
Odds Ratio
Neoplasms
Warm Ischemia
Search Engine
Glomerular Filtration Rate
Chronic Renal Insufficiency
Case-Control Studies
Demography
Margins of Excision

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Oncology

Cite this

Outcomes of Laparoscopic and Robotic Partial Nephrectomy for Large (>4 Cm) Kidney Tumors : Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. / Pavan, Nicola; Derweesh, Ithaar H.; Mir, Carme Maria; Novara, Giacomo; Hampton, Lance J.; Ferro, Matteo; Perdonà, Sisto; Parekh, Dipen J.; Porpiglia, Francesco; Autorino, Riccardo.

In: Annals of Surgical Oncology, 08.2017, p. 1-9.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Pavan, Nicola ; Derweesh, Ithaar H. ; Mir, Carme Maria ; Novara, Giacomo ; Hampton, Lance J. ; Ferro, Matteo ; Perdonà, Sisto ; Parekh, Dipen J. ; Porpiglia, Francesco ; Autorino, Riccardo. / Outcomes of Laparoscopic and Robotic Partial Nephrectomy for Large (>4 Cm) Kidney Tumors : Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. In: Annals of Surgical Oncology. 2017 ; pp. 1-9.
@article{068ba3cca1d84cd7ae3da01c9b0d5b7d,
title = "Outcomes of Laparoscopic and Robotic Partial Nephrectomy for Large (>4 Cm) Kidney Tumors: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis",
abstract = "Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of minimally invasive (laparoscopic and robotic) partial nephrectomy (MIPN) for large renal masses. Materials and Methods: A systematic literature review was performed up to September 2016 using multiple search engines to identify studies comparing MIPN for tumors larger than 4 cm (>cT1a) with MIPN for tumors smaller than 4 cm (cT1a). The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) criteria were used for article selection. Baseline demographics and surgical, functional, and oncological parameters were extracted from the included studies whenever available. An overall analysis including all studies was performed, then sensitivity analyses were performed for studies on laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (PN) only, and, finally, for studies on robotic PN only. Results: Overall, 13 case-control studies comparing the outcomes of PN in tumors <4 cm (n = 4441) with those of PN for tumors >4 cm (n = 1024) were included. Warm ischemia time was shorter for the <4 cm group [weighted mean difference (WMD) 3.75 min; 95{\%} confidence interval (CI) −6.4 to −0.7; p = 0.01] and the odds of perioperative complications was lower [odds ratio (OR) 0.62; 95{\%} CI 0.5–0.8; p < 0.001]. There were no significant differences in terms of postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (WMD 4.2 ml/min; 95{\%} CI 0.45–8.97; p = 0.08), as well as onset of postoperative chronic kidney disease (risk ratio 0.71; 95{\%} CI 0.48–1.04; p = 0.08). In addition, no difference was found in the likelihood of positive surgical margins (OR 0.74; 95{\%} CI 0.43–1.28; p = 0.29). Conclusions: MIPN represents a viable treatment option for renal masses larger than 4 cm (higher than cT1a) as it offers good functional outcomes, without increased risk of positive surgical margins. An increased rate of complications should be taken into account when approaching these tumors.",
author = "Nicola Pavan and Derweesh, {Ithaar H.} and Mir, {Carme Maria} and Giacomo Novara and Hampton, {Lance J.} and Matteo Ferro and Sisto Perdon{\`a} and Parekh, {Dipen J.} and Francesco Porpiglia and Riccardo Autorino",
year = "2017",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1245/s10434-017-5831-5",
language = "English",
pages = "1--9",
journal = "Annals of Surgical Oncology",
issn = "1068-9265",
publisher = "Springer New York LLC",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Outcomes of Laparoscopic and Robotic Partial Nephrectomy for Large (>4 Cm) Kidney Tumors

T2 - Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

AU - Pavan, Nicola

AU - Derweesh, Ithaar H.

AU - Mir, Carme Maria

AU - Novara, Giacomo

AU - Hampton, Lance J.

AU - Ferro, Matteo

AU - Perdonà, Sisto

AU - Parekh, Dipen J.

AU - Porpiglia, Francesco

AU - Autorino, Riccardo

PY - 2017/8

Y1 - 2017/8

N2 - Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of minimally invasive (laparoscopic and robotic) partial nephrectomy (MIPN) for large renal masses. Materials and Methods: A systematic literature review was performed up to September 2016 using multiple search engines to identify studies comparing MIPN for tumors larger than 4 cm (>cT1a) with MIPN for tumors smaller than 4 cm (cT1a). The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) criteria were used for article selection. Baseline demographics and surgical, functional, and oncological parameters were extracted from the included studies whenever available. An overall analysis including all studies was performed, then sensitivity analyses were performed for studies on laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (PN) only, and, finally, for studies on robotic PN only. Results: Overall, 13 case-control studies comparing the outcomes of PN in tumors <4 cm (n = 4441) with those of PN for tumors >4 cm (n = 1024) were included. Warm ischemia time was shorter for the <4 cm group [weighted mean difference (WMD) 3.75 min; 95% confidence interval (CI) −6.4 to −0.7; p = 0.01] and the odds of perioperative complications was lower [odds ratio (OR) 0.62; 95% CI 0.5–0.8; p < 0.001]. There were no significant differences in terms of postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (WMD 4.2 ml/min; 95% CI 0.45–8.97; p = 0.08), as well as onset of postoperative chronic kidney disease (risk ratio 0.71; 95% CI 0.48–1.04; p = 0.08). In addition, no difference was found in the likelihood of positive surgical margins (OR 0.74; 95% CI 0.43–1.28; p = 0.29). Conclusions: MIPN represents a viable treatment option for renal masses larger than 4 cm (higher than cT1a) as it offers good functional outcomes, without increased risk of positive surgical margins. An increased rate of complications should be taken into account when approaching these tumors.

AB - Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of minimally invasive (laparoscopic and robotic) partial nephrectomy (MIPN) for large renal masses. Materials and Methods: A systematic literature review was performed up to September 2016 using multiple search engines to identify studies comparing MIPN for tumors larger than 4 cm (>cT1a) with MIPN for tumors smaller than 4 cm (cT1a). The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) criteria were used for article selection. Baseline demographics and surgical, functional, and oncological parameters were extracted from the included studies whenever available. An overall analysis including all studies was performed, then sensitivity analyses were performed for studies on laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (PN) only, and, finally, for studies on robotic PN only. Results: Overall, 13 case-control studies comparing the outcomes of PN in tumors <4 cm (n = 4441) with those of PN for tumors >4 cm (n = 1024) were included. Warm ischemia time was shorter for the <4 cm group [weighted mean difference (WMD) 3.75 min; 95% confidence interval (CI) −6.4 to −0.7; p = 0.01] and the odds of perioperative complications was lower [odds ratio (OR) 0.62; 95% CI 0.5–0.8; p < 0.001]. There were no significant differences in terms of postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (WMD 4.2 ml/min; 95% CI 0.45–8.97; p = 0.08), as well as onset of postoperative chronic kidney disease (risk ratio 0.71; 95% CI 0.48–1.04; p = 0.08). In addition, no difference was found in the likelihood of positive surgical margins (OR 0.74; 95% CI 0.43–1.28; p = 0.29). Conclusions: MIPN represents a viable treatment option for renal masses larger than 4 cm (higher than cT1a) as it offers good functional outcomes, without increased risk of positive surgical margins. An increased rate of complications should be taken into account when approaching these tumors.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85015640666&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85015640666&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1245/s10434-017-5831-5

DO - 10.1245/s10434-017-5831-5

M3 - Article

SP - 1

EP - 9

JO - Annals of Surgical Oncology

JF - Annals of Surgical Oncology

SN - 1068-9265

ER -