Hand-assisted vs. retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy

Laparoscopic Management of Kidney Cancer: Updated Review

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy has emerged as the preferred option for the surgical management of kidney cancer. Although many reports have been published regarding the operative outcome of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and upper-tract transitional cell carcinoma (TCCA) treated laparoscopically, few review the oncologic outcome of these pathologies treated with laparoscopic techniques.

METHODS

We review the literature regarding the laparoscopic approaches, the complications related to laparoscopic surgery, and the long-term oncologic results of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy, partial nephrectomy, and nephroureterectomy.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy has become the new standard of care for most patients with suspected RCCs that are not amenable to nephron-sparing procedures. Laparoscopic techniques for managing RCC and TCCA are safe, follow well-established guidelines for surgical dissection, and meet or exceed perioperative convalescence and oncologic outcomes compared to traditional open procedures. The surgical techniques and the long-term outcome data for laparoscopic partial nephrectomy continue to mature.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopy is a minimally invasive option available to most patients with kidney cancer. The immediate benefits of laparoscopy are well established and include less estimated blood loss, decreased pain, shorter perioperative convalescence, and improved cosmesis. Long-term oncologic outcomes of patients treated laparoscopically for kidney tumors resemble those of the open surgical approach.

Meta-analysis of the complications of laparoscopic renal surgery: comparison of procedures and techniques

PURPOSE

We performed a meta-analysis of the literature to define the current expectations of complications during laparoscopic renal surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

References were searched in the MEDLINE database from 1995 to 2004 using the terms complications and laparoscopic nephrectomy. Inclusion criteria were any series with greater than 20 cases, patient age older than 16 years and any complications listed for certain procedures, including laparoscopic radical nephrectomy, HA laparoscopic radical nephrectomy, LPN, HALPN, laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, HA laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, laparoscopic simple nephrectomy, laparoscopic nephroureterectomy and retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy. A data extraction form was created to categorize major or minor complications. A 5 member panel adhered to the strict criteria and extracted data from articles that met inclusion criteria. Data were entered into a spreadsheet and a meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Initial review identified 73 of 405 references that were acceptable for retrieval and data extraction, of which 56 met inclusion criteria. The overall major and minor complication rates of laparoscopic renal surgery were 9.5% and 1.9%, respectively. There was a significant difference between the major complication rates of LPN and HALPN (21.0% vs 3.3%, p <0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that patients who undergo laparoscopic renal surgery may have an overall major complication rate of 9.5%. The highest major complication rate is associated with technically challenging LPN (21%). There appears to be a significantly higher wound complication rate associated with HA surgery in comparison to that of standard laparoscopy (1.9% vs 0.2%, p <0.05).

A Prospective Study of Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy for T1 Tumors—Is Transperitoneal, Retroperitoneal or Hand Assisted the Best Approach?

PURPOSE

We designed a prospective, randomized clinical trial to compare 3 common approaches to laparoscopic radical nephrectomy, namely transperitoneal, retroperitoneal and hand assisted.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 33 patients with a solid renal mass of 7 cm or less were prospectively enrolled in alternating fashion to a hand assisted procedure, a transperitoneal procedure with morcellation and a retroperitoneal procedure with intact specimen extraction. A single surgeon performed all operations. Preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative criteria were compared among the 3 techniques.

RESULTS

A total of 11 patients underwent each type of procedure. There was no significant difference in age, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, body mass index or tumor size among the groups. Mean operative time was significantly lower using the hand assisted approach, whereas estimated blood loss was similar in all 3 groups. Incision size, hospital stay and time to normal daily activity were less using the transperitoneal approach. While not significant, there was a trend toward less narcotic use in the transperitoneal group. Hernia formation was seen with increased frequency in the hand assisted group.

CONCLUSIONS

In our series the hand assisted approach had significantly shorter operative time than the transperitoneal or retroperitoneal approach but it had the greatest risk of hernia formation. The transperitoneal approach was associated with a significantly shorter hospital stay and the earliest resumption of normal activity.

Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: techniques, results and oncological outcome in 125 consecutive cases

OBJECTIVES

Renal cell carcinoma is likely to become one of the most important indication for laparoscopic surgery. The laparoscopic technique combines the benefits of minimal invasive approach with established surgical principles. In our institution the laparoscopic transperitoneal approach with intact specimen removal has become the standard technique for radical nephrectomies. We report the indications, techniques and oncological outcome in a single center experience.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between July 1999 and March 2003 we performed laparoscopic radical nephrectomies for renal cell cancer in 125 patients. Their initial staging, complications, and postoperative course were evaluated. During this period a total of about 1800 laparoscopic cases were performed. To date 82 patients were available for follow up data and have been analyzed for oncological outcome. Patients with primary metastatic disease were excluded from this analysis.

RESULTS

123 procedures out of 125 were successful. In two cases (1.6%) conversion to open surgery was necessary due to bleeding (1 case) or bowel injury (1 case). In additional 3 cases (2.4%) intraoperative complications could be managed laparoscopically. In two cases (1.6%) postoperative bleeding lead to open revision for hemostasis. The mean tumor size was 5.1cm (range 2-14 cm); median blood loss was 210 ml (range 50-900 ml). The mean surgical time was 200 min (range 90-435), including the learning curves of five surgeons. Histological findings were pT1 in 78 (62.4%), pT2 in 12 (9.6%) and pT3 in 28 (22.4%) patients. In 7 cases (5.6%) histology did not confirm malignant disease. Positive lymph nodes were detected in 3 cases (2.4%); surgical margins were negative for tumor in all patients. Follow-up was between 3 and 50 months with an average of 23.5 months. Disease progression was observed in 3 cases after 6, 11 and 12 months. No cases of local recurrence or port metastasis occurred during observation.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is a routine, effective treatment for patients with pT1-2N0M0 renal cell carcinoma. With more experience a tumor up to 10-12 m in size can be managed safely offering all the benefits of minimal surgery to the patients. Although no long-term follow-up is available our follow-up data up to 50 months confirm the effectiveness of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy in terms of surgical principles and oncological outcome.

Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy

Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is the new standard of care for localized renal cancer. Hand assistance makes the procedure less daunting by providing tactile feedback. The authors consider the indications, contraindications, and technique for this operation, which provides the patient with the benefits of minimally invasive surgery while shortening the learning curve for the surgeon and allowing experienced laparoscopists to carry out more complex and challenging operations.

Selection of Patients for Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery

Each of the well-established approaches to laparoscopy-standard transperitoneal, standard retroperitoneal, and transperitoneal hand-assisted-has its advantages and disadvantages. In order to maximize efficiency and patient benefit, each approach should be used selectively. This paper offers recommendations for the selective use of the hand-assisted technique, which is particularly useful when intact specimen removal is required, the surgeon has limited experience, the situation is expected to be difficult (e.g., prior surgery, fibrosis, inflammation), or the patient's other medical comorbidities mandate a rapid procedure.

Hand-Assisted Retroperitoneoscopic Radical Nephrectomy and Nephroureterectomy

In laparoscopic operations for renal tumor and upper urinary-tract transitional-cell carcinoma (TCC), three approaches - the transperitoneal, retroperitoneal, and transperitoneal hand-assisted - have been reported. We have performed hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic radical nephrectomy (RN) since 1999 and nephroureterectomy (NU) since 2000. The surgical techniques and the operative results of 95 cases of RN and 54 cases of NU are described and analyzed. These procedures were effective and safe for renal tumors and upper urinary-tract TCC.

Cost comparison of hand assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy and open nephrectomy: analysis of individual parameters

PURPOSE

Hand assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy (HAL) is an effective approach to nephrectomy that is less morbid than open nephrectomy (ON). In response to budgetary pressure at our large county hospital we reviewed the published experience and identified the cost components of HAL that could be targeted to decrease procedure cost.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive literature review of HAL and ON was performed and certain parameters were abstracted, including operative (OR) time, operative equipment and hospital stay (LOS). Using these data the projected overall cost and individual cost centers at our institution for HAL and ON were compared. Decision tree analysis models were devised to estimate the cost of each treatment using computer software. One and 2-way sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the effect of individual treatment variables on overall cost.

RESULTS

The literature showed 6 and 9 reports on 127 and 419 patients for ON and HAL, respectively. LOS was 5 and 3 days for ON and HAL, respectively. OR time was 169 and 204 minutes for ON and HAL, respectively. Based on a review of the costs at our institution ON was a less costly procedure by $205 ($6,882 vs $7,087 US dollars). The slight cost superiority of the open approach was due to significantly lower costs associated with operating room time and equipment. On the other hand, HAL demonstrated a cost advantage for LOS. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that HAL was less costly if HAL OR time was less than 184 minutes, LOS following HAL was less than 2.5 days or HAL OR supply costs were less than $718 US dollars. Two-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that HAL was cost advantageous if performed in less than 3 hours and the patient was discharged home within 3 postoperative days.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary cost variables for nephrectomy include OR time, LOS stay and equipment cost. Using published data and decision tree analysis ON is slightly less costly by $205 US dollars than HAL at our institution. However, HAL can be more cost-effective than ON when OR time and LOS are low. Our model identifies several measures that can be used at any institution to render HAL economically superior to ON.

Single-center comparison of purely laparoscopic, hand-assisted laparoscopic, and open radical nephrectomy in patients at high anesthetic risk

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The laparoscopic approach for management of high-risk patients with renal-cell carcinoma (RCC) may reduce perioperative and postoperative morbidity. The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of purely laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN), hand-assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (HALRN), and open radical nephrectomy (ORN) for renal tumors in a population of patients at high risk for perioperative complications.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients undergoing radical nephrectomy for presumed RCC between August 1999 and August 2001 at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and having an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score of >/=3 were reviewed. Patients with known metastasis, local invasion, caval thrombi, or additional simultaneous surgical procedures were excluded from analysis. Thirteen patients underwent LRN, eight patients underwent HALRN, and 26 underwent ORN. The patient demographics were similar in the three groups. The groups were compared with regard to intraoperative and postoperative parameters. Statistical analysis was done using chi-square testing for categorical variables and analysis of variance (ANOVA) for continuous variables. Differences in outcomes were examined using ANOVA and Dunnett's T for pairwise comparisons.

RESULTS

The ASA 4 patients had significantly longer hospital stays and total hospital costs than the ASA 3 patients. The mean operative time in the ASA 3 patients was similar in the three groups: 2.8 hours, 2.8 hours, and 2.5 hours for the LRN, HALRN, and ORN patients, respectively. Both the LRN patients (22.9 mg of morphine sulfate equivalent) and the HALRN patients (42.1 mg) required less pain medication than the open surgery patients (97.7 mg). When the total hospital costs were compared, LRN was less costly than HALRN ($6089 v $7678; P = 0.57) and open surgery ($6089 v $7694; P = 0.04). The complication rate in the LRN, HALRN, and ORN group was 0%, 25%, and 27%, respectively, although the differences were not statistically different (P = 0.12).

CONCLUSIONS

Both LRN and HALRN can be performed safely in patients with significant comorbid conditions. Careful preoperative preparation, intraoperative monitoring, and awareness of laparoscopy-induced oliguria can preclude inadvertent overhydration, hemodilution, and congestive heart failure. Both LRN and HALRN result in less pain medication requirement and faster return to oral intake than ORN, and LRN results in fewer perioperative complications than HALRN or ORN in patients at high perioperative risk. The LRN technique has a 21% lower total cost than both HALRN and ORN.

Hand assisted retroperitoneoscopic nephroureterectomy: comparison with the open procedure

PURPOSE

We report our initial experience with hand assisted retroperitoneoscopic nephroureterectomy for upper urinary tract transitional cell carcinoma and compared our results to those of a contemporary series of open nephroureterectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Clinical data on 34 consecutive patients who underwent hand assisted retroperitoneoscopic nephroureterectomy were reviewed and compared with those on 34 who underwent open nephroureterectomy. All specimens were extracted intact.

RESULTS

Total operative time was similar in the 2 groups (233 versus 236 minutes). Estimated blood loss was significantly less in the hand assisted laparoscopy group (236 versus 427 ml.). During convalescence the frequency of parenteral analgesia postoperatively was significantly lower in the laparoscopy group than in the open surgery group. The former patients had a significantly shorter interval to oral intake and ambulation as well as a shorter hospital stay and convalescence compared with those who underwent open surgery. In each group the complication rate was 12% (4 of 34 cases). In the hand assisted laparoscopy group 1 conversion to an open procedure was due to bleeding. There was recurrence in 4 of the 34 patients (12%) in the laparoscopy group, including 2 with bladder recurrence and 2 with metastases, at an average followup of 13.1 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Hand assisted retroperitoneoscopic nephroureterectomy is an effective and safe alternative to open nephroureterectomy for upper urinary tract transitional cell carcinoma.

[Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: indications, techniques, and oncological outcome]

Renal cell carcinoma is likely to become one of the most important indications for laparoscopic surgery worldwide. The laparoscopic technique combines the benefits of the minimally invasive approach with established surgical principles. In our institution the laparoscopic transperitoneal approach with intact specimen extraction has become the standard technique for radical nephrectomies. We report the indications, techniques, and oncological outcome in a single center experience in 100 cases. The mean tumor size was 5.9 cm (range: 2-11 cm), the blood loss was 220 ml, and the mean surgical time was 211 min, including the learning curves of five surgeons. Histological findings were pT1 in 66 (66%), pT2 in 11 (11%), and pT3 in 19 (19%) patients with an increasing tumor size according to the experience of the surgeons. In four cases (4%) histology did not prove malignant disease. Positive lymph nodes were detected in three cases (3%) and surgical margins were negative for tumor in all patients. To date 61 patients were available for follow-up; patients with primary metastatic disease were excluded from this analysis. Follow-up was between 1 and 30 months with an average of 12.9 months. Progressive disease occurred in two cases in patients with pT3G3 tumors. No cases of local recurrence or port metastasis occurred during observation. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is a routine, effective treatment for patients with renal cell carcinoma. Our follow-up data up to 30 months confirm the effectiveness of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy in terms of surgical principles and oncological outcome.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy-associated rhabdomyolysis with ARF

Intraoperative rhabdomyolysis with resultant acute renal failure is a rare complication seen, most commonly, with urologic surgical procedures. Since the early 1990s, the refinement of laparoscopic techniques has permitted their application more broadly. Among the procedures to benefit from these less invasive surgical methods has been radical nephrectomy. In general, this has resulted in less postoperative pain and shorter convalescence. Nonetheless, laparoscopic radical nephrectomy still represents major surgery and is not free from operative risks. To highlight one of these risks, we present a case of a young, obese man with renal cell carcinoma who underwent a hand-assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy that was complicated by rhabdomyolsis resulting in acute renal failure (ARF). We discuss the clinical insults that contributed to the development of azotemia with particular attention paid to our current understanding of the pathogenesis of myoglobinuric ARF. In addition, we review the literature concerning surgery-associated, rhabdomyolytic ARF with the aim of providing clinicians guidance for the avoidance and early recognition of this rare, but very serious, surgical complication.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy

Hand-assisted surgery enjoys the benefits of open surgery while maintaining the post-operative advantages of laparoscopy. Logical indications for its application largely include those cases that require removal of a large amount of tissue intact. Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery may find application in complex procedures such as radical, partial and difficult nephrectomies.