Simple enucleation versus standard partial nephrectomy for clinical T1 renal masses: Perioperative outcomes based on a matched-pair comparison of 396 patients (RECORd project)
Introduction
In the last decades, a net increase in the detection of small incidental renal masses has been observed and nephron-sparing surgery (NSS), aimed to preserve the largest amount of healthy renal tissue while obtaining similar oncologic outcomes of radical nephrectomy (RN), has become more popular.1, 2 Standard partial nephrectomy (SPN) consisting in the tumor removal with an adequate safety margin of health parenchyma is still considered as the gold standard technique.3 In the last decades, some Authors demonstrated that healthy parenchyma surrounding the tumor can be limited to a few millimeters without compromising the oncologic safety of partial nephrectomy (PN).4 Although the mean thickness of the safety margin surrounding the tumor ranges from 2.5 mm to 5 mm, some studies clearly demonstrated that the minimum values of thickness of the safety margin ranges between 0 mm and 1 mm above all at the bottom of the tumor.1 This variability of the thickness of the safety margin might be influenced by several anatomical and topographic tumor features. In this context, some Authors proposed the simple enucleation (SE) of the tumor as alternative to the SPN.5 This surgical procedure consists of a blunt dissection of the renal tumor following a plane between the capsule and the healthy renal tissue, without including any visible normal renal parenchyma. Recently, a multicenter, retrospective analysis reported similar cancer specific and recurrence free survival rates after SE and SPN.5 However, in the previous study no data concerning perioperative outcomes were reported. The objective of present study was to compare intraoperative and early post-operative outcomes observed in two recent cohort of patients who underwent SE or SPN for parenchymal renal masses.
Section snippets
Materials and methods
The Italian Registry of Conservative Renal Surgery (RECORd Project) is an observational multicenter prospectively derived dataset promoted by the Leading Urological No profit foundation Advanced research (LUNA) of the Italian Society of Urology. Patients who underwent open or laparoscopic PN for clinical T1 renal tumors between January 2009 and January 2011 at 19 urological Centers were collected in the registry and included into the study. The study was approved by the Internal Board Committee
Results
Overall, 198 patients that underwent SPN were matched with 198 patients that underwent SE. Demographics and tumors' characteristics are reported in Table 1. The two study groups were comparable in terms of: mean age, body mass index, gender, ECOG performance status, clinical tumor size, symptoms at diagnosis, type of indication, growth pattern, tumor location, glomerular filtration rate, hemoglobin level. The only difference that emerged between the two groups was the side of the tumor. Most
Comments
Recently, the interest for NSS has increased as several studies have demonstrated the oncologic equivalence with radical nephrectomy (RN) for the treatment of T1 RCC.14, 15 Various NSS techniques have been described. In 1950, Vermooten first suggested that peripheral renal tumors could be locally excised by leaving a margin of healthy parenchyma around the tumor of at least 1 cm.16, 17 Further studies have demonstrated that surgical margin involvement does not necessarily indicate residual
Conclusions
In a large multicenter prospectively derived dataset, SE is associated with shorter operative time and lower blood loss if compared to SPN. The two techniques are associated with similar WIT and similar incidence of overall, surgical and medical complications. The incidence of PSMs seems to be higher with SPN. The latter results need to be confirmed in further randomized studies aimed to minimize the possible confounding factors implied by a multicentre, observational study design.
Conflict of interest disclosure
Authors of this manuscript do not have any financial and personal relationships with other people or organisations that could inappropriately influence (bias) their work.
Funding
Unrestricted grant by the “Leading Urological No profit foundation Advanced research” (LUNA) of the Italian Society of Urology.
Abbreviations
- NSS
- Nephron-Sparing Surgery
- RN
- Radical Nephrectomy
- SPN
- Standard Partial Nephrectomy
- SE
- Simple Enucleation
- RECORd
- The Italian Registry of Conservative Renal Surgery
- ECOG
- Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group
- WIT
- Warm Ischemia Time
- PSM
- Positive Surgical Margin
References (29)
- et al.
Is simple enucleation a minimal partial nephrectomy responding to the EAU guidelines' recommendations?
Eur Urol
(2009 Jun) A history of partial nephrectomy for renal tumors
J Urol
(2005 Mar)- et al.
Nephron sparing surgery for renal tumors: indications, techniques and outcomes
J Urol
(2001 Jul) - et al.
Does the size of the surgical margin in partial nephrectomy for renal cell cancer really matter?
J Urol
(2002 Jan) - et al.
Simple enucleation is equivalent to traditional partial nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: results of a nonrandomized, retrospective, comparative study
J Urol
(2011 May) - et al.
Multi-institutional validation of a symptom based classification for renal cell carcinoma
J Urol
(2004) - et al.
Nephron-sparing surgery versus radical nephrectomy in the treatment of intracapsular renal cell carcinoma up to 7 cm
Eur Urol
(2008 Apr) - et al.
A prospective, randomised EORTC intergroup phase 3 study comparing the oncologic outcome of elective nephron-sparing surgery and radical nephrectomy for low-stage renal cell carcinoma
Eur Urol
(2011 Apr) Indications for conservative surgery in certain renal tumors: a study based on the growth pattern of the cell carcinoma
J Urol
(1950 Aug)- et al.
The prognostic value of the width of the surgical margin in the enucleoresection of small renal cell carcinoma: an intermediate-term follow-up
Urology
(2010 Sep)