Simultaneous Adrenalectomy During Radical Nephrectomy for Renal Cell Carcinoma Will Not Cure Patients With Adrenal Metastasis

Robotic Partial vs Radical Nephrectomy for Clinical T3a Tumors: A Narrative Review

Introduction: T3a renal masses include a diverse group of tumors that invade the perirenal and/or sinus fat, pelvicaliceal system, or renal vein. The majority of cT3a renal masses represent renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and have historically been treated with radical nephrectomy (RN) given their aggressive nature. With the adoption of minimally invasive approaches to renal surgery, the combination of improved observation, pneumoperitoneum, and robotic articulation has allowed urologists to consider partial nephrectomy (PN) for more complex tumors. Herein, we review the existing literature regarding robot-assisted PN (RAPN) and robot-assisted RN (RARN) in the management of T3a renal masses. Methods: A literature search was performed using PubMed for articles evaluating the role of RARN and RAPN for T3a renal masses. Search parameters were limited to English language studies. Applicable studies were abstracted and included in this narrative review. Results: T3a RCC caused by renal sinus fat or venous involvement is associated with ∼50% lower cancer-specific survival than those with perinephric fat invasion alone. CT and MRI can both be used to stage cT3a tumors, however, MRI is more accurate when assessing venous involvement. Upstaging to pT3a RCC during RAPN does not confer a worse prognosis than pT3a tumors treated with RARN; however, patients who undergo RAPN for T3a RCC with venous involvement have relatively higher rates of recurrence and metastasis. Intraoperative tools including drop-in ultrasound, near-infrared fluorescence, and 3D virtual models improve the ability to perform RAPN for T3a tumors. In well-selected cases, warm ischemia times remain reasonable. Conclusions: cT3a renal masses represent a diverse group of tumors. Depending on substratification of cT3a, RARN or RAPN can be employed for treatment of such masses.

Tumor-to-tumor metastasis of clear cell renal cell carcinoma to contralateral synchronous pheochromocytoma: A case report

BACKGROUND

Tumor-to-tumor metastasis (TTM) is an uncommon condition. Only a few cases of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) as donor tumor of TTM have been reported in literature, and none of these studies have described RCC metastasizing to synchronous pheochromocytoma (PCC).

CASE SUMMARY

The patient was a 54-year-old woman who presented with recurrent dull abdominal pain for six months, which was further aggravated for one more month. Enhanced computed tomography revealed a tumor mass in the right kidney and another mass in the left retroperitoneum/adrenal gland. Histopathology and immunochemistry of resected specimens confirmed the diagnosis of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (CCRCC) of the right kidney, and the left retroperitoneum revealed a typical PCC with CCRCC metastasis. Whole exome sequencing revealed the presence of a c.529A>T somatic mutation of the Von Hippel Lindau (VHL) gene in the metastasized CCRCC, which was also present in the primary right kidney CCRCC, as confirmed by Sanger sequencing. No VHL mutation was detected in the PCC or in normal right kidney tissue. Fluorescence in situ hybridization revealed loss of chromosome 3p in both the primary right kidney CCRCC and CCRCC metastasized to PCC in the left kidney.

CONCLUSION

This is the first case showing metastasis of CCRCC to PCC, thus leading to tumor-to-tumor metastasis.

Prognostic analysis of postoperative clinically nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma

Objectives

To investigate the survival characteristics of postoperative nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients, and the predictive value of a prognostic model.

Materials and Methods

We retrospectively evaluated data from 1202 postoperative nonmetastatic RCC patients who were treated between 1999 and 2012 at West China Hospital, Sichuan University (Chengdu, China). In addition, we also evaluated data relating to 53 205 cases acquired from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program. Survival analysis was performed on the cases, and subgroups, using the Kaplan‐Meier and Cox regression methods. The concordance index of the Stage Size Grade Necrosis (SSIGN), Leibovich, and the UCLA integrated staging system, scores was determined to evaluate the accuracy of these outcome prediction models.

Results

The 5‐year overall survival rate for RCC cases in West China Hospital was 87.6%; this was higher than that observed for SEER cases. Survival analysis identified several factors that exerted significant influence over prognosis, including the time of surgery, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, tumor stage, size, nuclear differentiation, pathological subtypes, along with necrotic and sarcomatoid differentiation. Moreover tumor stage, size, and nuclear grade were all identified as independent predictors for both our cases and those from the SEER program. Patient groups with advanced RCC, and poorly differentiated RCC subgroups, were both determined to have a poor prognosis. The SSIGN model yielded the best predictive value as a prognostic model, followed by the Leibovich, and UCLA integrated staging system; this was the case for our patients, and for sub‐groups with a poor prognosis.

Conclusion

The prognosis of RCC was mostly influenced by tumor stage, size, and nuclear differentiation. SSIGN may represent the most suitable prognostic model for the Chinese population.

The Role of Adrenalectomy in Renal Cancer

CONTEXT

Since the 1960s, routine ipsilateral adrenalectomy (IA) has been considered an integral step in the removal of renal tumors as a part of a radical nephrectomy. However, recent data from the past decade have narrowed the indications for adrenalectomy and called into question the need for adrenalectomy at all in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

OBJECTIVE

We sought to identify the role of adrenalectomy in the treatment of RCC. Specifically, we wanted to answer the following questions: What is the incidence of ipsilateral adrenal involvement by cancer? How reliable is preoperative imaging? What is the rate of ipsilateral and contralateral metachronous recurrence? And finally, what are the potential noncancer sequelae from unnecessary removal of the adrenal gland?

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic literature search of Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, and Ovid Medline was performed to identify studies evaluating the role of adrenalectomy during RCC surgery. Only articles published in English from the years 2000-2015 were included. Case reports, articles about primary adrenal tumors, letters to the editor, and surgical technique papers were excluded.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

We found little evidence to suggest that routine IA is associated with a higher risk of short-term surgical or medical complications. We did not find evidence that IA is associated with improved cancer control. Tomographic preoperative imaging of the adrenal gland demonstrating no cancer involvement is rarely wrong (<1% of the time), and the few adrenal lesions missed on imaging can often be identified intraoperatively. Some evidence indicates that IA may be associated with worse long-term survival. Adrenalectomy rates have been decreasing in recent years, reflecting a changing practice pattern.

CONCLUSIONS

IA at the time of kidney surgery for a renal mass should be performed only if radiographic or intraoperative evidence indicates adrenal gland involvement.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We sought to define the role of adrenalectomy in patients with kidney cancer. Although there are not high-quality studies to answer this question definitively, we conclude that the adrenal gland should be spared unless there is clinical evidence of adrenal involvement.

Comparative effectiveness of adrenal sparing radical nephrectomy and non-adrenal sparing radical nephrectomy in clear cell renal cell carcinoma: Observational study of survival outcomes

INTRODUCTION

We compare the survival outcomes of patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treated with adrenal sparing radical nephrectomy (ASRN) and non-adrenal sparing radical nephrectomy (NASRN).

METHODS

We conducted an observational study based on a composite patient population from two university teaching hospitals who underwent RN for RCC between January 2000 and December 2012. Only patients with pathologically confirmed RCC were included. We excluded patients undergoing cytoreductive nephrectomy, with loco-regional lymph node involvement. In total, 579 patients (ASRN = 380 and NASRN = 199) met our study criteria. Patients were categorized by risk groups (all stage, early stage and locally advanced RCC). Overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were analyzed for risk groups. Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 41 months (range: 12-157). There were significant benefits in OS (ASRN 79.5% vs. NASRN 63.3%; p = 0.001) and CSS (84.3% vs. 74.9%; p = 0.001), with any differences favouring ASRN in all stage. On multivariate analysis, there was a trend towards worse OS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.759, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.943-2.309, p = 0.089) and CSS (HR 1.797, 95% CI 0.967-3.337, p = 0.064) in patients with NASRN (although not statistically significant). Of these patients, only 11 (1.9%) had adrenal involvement.

CONCLUSIONS

The inherent limitations in our study include the impracticality of conducting a prospective randomized trial in this scenario. Our observational study with a 13-year follow-up suggests ASRN leads to better survival than NASRN. ASRN should be considered the gold standard in treating patients with RCC, unless it is contraindicated.

Indications for adrenalectomy during radical nephrectomy for renal cancer

Objectives

To determine if the selection criteria for ipsilateral adrenalectomy during laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (RN) can be further restricted, with the goal of sparing more patients unnecessary adrenalectomy while preserving the removal of adrenal glands containing malignancy, as recent evidence suggests that adrenalectomy in association with RN for renal cancer can be limited to patients with abnormalities on adrenal imaging or large upper-pole renal tumours.

Patients and methods

The cohort consisted of two data sets, each from one institution, i.e., a training set and a validation set. All patients underwent RN for radiographically localised disease. Removal of the adrenal gland was based on the surgeon’s preference, related to the presence of a suspect adrenal lesion on preoperative imaging, suspicion for involvement of the adrenal gland intraoperatively, location of the tumour, size of the tumour and local tumour stage.

Results

Of 159 patients in the training cohort, three (2%) had metastatic renal cancer in the ipsilateral adrenal gland. All three patients had tumours of >7 cm and either an abnormal radiographic appearance of the adrenal gland or suspect intraoperative findings. In the validation cohort of 74 patients, seven (10%) had adrenal metastasis, of which one had a tumour of <7 cm and the indication for adrenalectomy was the high intraoperative suspicion.

Conclusion

We recommend performing ipsilateral adrenalectomy in association with RN for renal cancer when there is either abnormal radiographic appearance of the adrenal gland or suspect intraoperative findings, with no regard for primary tumour size.

Routine adrenalectomy in patients with locally advanced renal cell cancer does not offer oncologic benefit and places a significant portion of patients at risk for an asynchronous metastasis in a solitary adrenal gland

BACKGROUND

The indications for the removal of the ipsilateral adrenal gland in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and the long-term outcomes have not been well studied.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the risk of synchronous and asynchronous adrenal involvement in patients with RCC and the effect of adrenalectomy on recurrence and survival in a large, single-institution cohort.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

From 1970 to 2006, 4018 consecutive patients with RCC treated by surgical extirpation (radical nephrectomy [RN]: 3107; partial nephrectomy [PN]: 911) from Mayo Clinic were studied for adrenal involvement. Risk of asynchronous adrenal metastasis and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were also compared between those who underwent concomitant ipsilateral adrenalectomy (n = 1541) and those who did not (n = 2477) using multivariate Cox models.

INTERVENTION

Surgical removal of the adrenal gland at the time of kidney tumor resection.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcome is cancer specific survival; secondary outcomes are incidence of synchronous and asynchronous adrenal metastases.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Median postoperative follow-up among those still alive was 8.2 yr (interquartile range [IQR]: 5.3-13.6). Synchronous ipsilateral adrenal involvement was rare (n = 88; 2.2%). Ipsilateral adrenalectomy at the time of nephrectomy did not lower the risk of subsequent adrenal metastasis (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64-1.42) or improve CSS (HR: 1.08; 95% CI, 0.95-1.22). The development of asynchronous adrenal metastasis occurred in 147 patients (3.7%) at a median of 3.7 yr (IQR: 1.2-7.7) after initial surgery. The risk of developing an ipsilateral versus a contralateral asynchronous adrenal metastasis was equivalent at 10 yr in those who did not undergo adrenalectomy at initial surgery. This study is limited by its single-institution, nonrandomized nature.

CONCLUSIONS

Routine ipsilateral adrenalectomy in patients with high-risk features does not appear to offer any oncologic benefit while placing a significant portion of patients at risk for metastasis in a solitary adrenal gland. Therefore, adrenalectomy should only be performed with radiographic or intraoperative evidence of adrenal involvement.