In addition to its established advantages, laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (RN) poses a unique set of challenges over traditional open surgery. In this study, we discuss preoperative considerations and detailed steps for laparoscopic RN. We review the transabdominal approach in detail, including patient positioning, equipment, and port placement in addition to the surgical steps. Intraoperative decisions such as adrenal management, renal preservation, and tumor identification are reviewed. Common complications of laparoscopic renal surgery are also summarized.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
WilleAH, RoigasJ, DegerS, et al.Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: Techniques, results and oncological outcome in 125 consecutive cases. Eur Urol, 2004; 45:483–489.
2.
BansalRK, TuHYV, DrachenbergD, et al.Laparoscopic management of advanced renal cell carcinoma with renal vein and inferior vena cava thrombus. Urology, 2014; 83:812–816.
3.
RomeroFR, MuntenerM, BaggaHS, et al.Pure laparoscopic radical nephrectomy with level II vena caval thrombectomy. Urology, 2006; 68:1112–1114.
4.
LiuZ, TangS, TianX, et al.Laparoscopic conversion to open surgery in radical nephrectomy and tumor thrombectomy: Causal analysis, clinical characteristics, and treatment strategies. BMC Surg, 2020; 20:185.
5.
WassermanM, SobelD, PareekG. Choice of surgical options in kidney cancer and surgical complications. Semin Nephrol, 2020; 40:42–48.
6.
CampbellS, UzzoRG, AllafME, et al.Renal mass and localized renal cancer: AUA guideline. J Urology, 2017; 198:520–529.
7.
FinelliA, IsmailaN, BroB, et al.Management of small renal masses: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Oncol, 2017; 35:668–680.
8.
LjungbergB, BensalahK, CanfieldS, et al.EAU Guidelines on Renal Cell Carcinoma: 2014 Update. Eur Urol, 2015; 67:913–924.
9.
Herrera-CaceresJO, FinelliA, JewettMAS. Renal tumor biopsy: Indicators, technique, safety, accuracy results, and impact on treatment decision management. World J Urol, 2019; 37:437–443.
10.
RichardPO, JewettMAS, BhattJR, et al.Renal tumor biopsy for small renal masses: A single-center 13-year experience. Eur Urol, 2015; 68:1007–1013.
11.
LeveridgeMJ, FinelliA, KachuraJR, et al.Outcomes of small renal mass needle core biopsy, nondiagnostic percutaneous biopsy, and the role of repeat biopsy. Eur Urol, 2011; 60:578–584.
12.
CollDM, UzzoRG, HertsBR, et al.3-Dimensional volume rendered computerized tomography for preoperative evaluation and intraoperative treatment of patients undergoing nephron sparing surgery. J Urol, 1999; 161:1097–1102.
13.
WunderlichH, ReicheltO, SchubertR, et al.Preoperative simulation of partial nephrectomy with three-dimensional computed tomography. BJU Int, 2000; 86:777–781.
14.
CollDM, SmithRC. Update on radiological imaging of renal cell carcinoma. BJU Int, 2007; 99:1217–1222.
15.
KangSK, KimD, ChandaranaH. Contemporary imaging of the renal mass. Curr Urol Rep, 2011; 12:11–17.
16.
ElsamraS, PareekG. Complications of laparoscopic renal surgery. Int J Urol, 2010; 17:206–214.
17.
GaunayGS, ElsamraSE, RichstoneL. Trocars: Site selection, instrumentation, and overcoming complications. J Endourol, 2016; 30:833–843.
18.
AzevedoOC de, AzevedoJLMC, SorbelloAA, et al.Evaluation of tests performed to confirm the position of the Veress needle for creation of pneumoperitoneum in selected patients: A prospective clinical trial. Acta Cir Bras, 2006; 21:385–391.
19.
HassonHM.A modified instrument and method for laparoscopy. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1971; 110:886–887.
20.
GeorgeR, MathewM, RadhakrishnaV, et al.Modified Hasson technique versus Veress technique: A comparative study. Int Surg J, 2019; 6:3246–3250.
21.
HsiRS, OjoghoON, BaldwinDD. Analysis of techniques to secure the renal hilum during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: Review of the FDA database. Urology, 2009; 74:142–147.
22.
SimforooshN, SarhangnejadR, BasiriA, et al.Vascular clips are safe and a great cost-effective technique for arterial and venous control in laparoscopic nephrectomy: Single-center experience with 1834 laparoscopic nephrectomies. J Endourol, 2012; 26:1009–1012.
23.
PonskyL, CherulloE, MoinzadehA, et al.The Hem-o-Lok clip is safe for laparoscopic nephrectomy: A multi-institutional review. Urology, 2008; 71:593–596.
24.
LiuY, HuangZ, ChenY, et al.Staplers or clips?: A systematic review and meta-analysis of vessel controlling devices for renal pedicle ligation in laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. Medicine, 2018; 97:e13116.
25.
SchatloffO, RamonJ, LindnerU, et al.Is postoperative arteriovenous Fistula still a concern after en bloc stapling of the renal hilum during laparoscopic nephrectomy?. J Endourol, 2009; 23:639–643.
26.
ChungJH, LeeSW, LeeKS, et al.Safety of en bloc ligation of the renal hilum during laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: A randomized controlled trial. J Laparoendosc Adv S, 2013; 23:489–494.
27.
SchatloffO, NaduA, LindnerU, et al.Simplifying laparoscopic nephrectomy: The inferior approach with en bloc stapling of the renal hilum. JSLS, 2014; 18:e2014.00029.
28.
YapSA, AlibhaiSM, AbouassalyR, et al.Ipsilateral adrenalectomy at the time of radical nephrectomy impacts overall survival. BJU Int, 2013; 111:E54–E58.
29.
GillIS, McClennanBL, KerblK, et al.Adrenal involvement from renal cell carcinoma: Predictive value of computerized tomography. J Urol, 1994; 152:1082–1085.
30.
NasonGJ, AslamA, GiriSK. Predictive ability of preoperative CT scan in determining whether the adrenal gland is spared at radical nephrectomy. Curr Urol, 2016; 9:143–147.
31.
YapS, AlibhaiS, AbouassalyR, et al.Do we continue to unnecessarily perform ipsilateral adrenalectomy at the time of radical nephrectomy? A population based study. J Urol, 2012; 187:398–404.
32.
GabrAH, SteinbergZ, EggenerSE, et al.Indications for adrenalectomy during radical nephrectomy for renal cancer. Arab J Urol, 2014; 12:304–308.
33.
BinsalehS, MadboulyK, MatsumotoED, et al.A prospective randomized study of Pfannenstiel versus expanded port site incision for intact specimen extraction in laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. J Endourol, 2015; 29:913–918.
34.
FanX, XuK, LinT, et al.Comparison of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BJU Int, 2013; 111:611–621.
35.
MacLennanS, ImamuraM, LapitanMC, et al.Systematic review of perioperative and quality-of-life outcomes following surgical management of localised renal cancer. Eur Urol, 2012; 62:1097–1117.
36.
HuangWC, LeveyAS, SerioAM, et al.Chronic kidney disease after nephrectomy in patients with renal cortical tumours: A retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol, 2006; 7:735–740.
37.
ScosyrevE, MessingEM, SylvesterR, et al.Renal function after nephron-sparing surgery versus radical nephrectomy: Results from EORTC randomized trial 30904. Eur Urol, 2014; 65:372–377.
DrangsholtS, HuangWC. Current trends in renal surgery and observation for small renal masses. Urol Clin N Am, 2017; 44:169–178.
40.
BergerA, BrandinaR, AtallaMA, et al.Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: Oncological outcomes at 10 years or more. J Urol, 2009; 182:2172–2176.
41.
GratzkeC, SeitzM, BayrleF, et al.Quality of life and perioperative outcomes after retroperitoneoscopic radical nephrectomy (RN), open RN and nephron-sparing surgery in patients with renal cell carcinoma. BJU Int, 2009; 104:470–475.
42.
HemalAK, KumarA, KumarR, et al.Laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy for large renal tumors: A long-term prospective comparison. J Urol, 2007; 177:862–866.
43.
GillIS, KavoussiLR, LaneBR, et al.Comparison of 1,800 laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomies for single renal tumors. J Urol, 2007; 178:41–46.
44.
RossiSH, KlatteT, StewartGD. Quality of life outcomes in patients with localised renal cancer: A literature review. World J Urol, 2018; 36:1961–1972.
45.
KlinglerDW, HemstreetGP, BalajiKC. Feasibility of robotic radical nephrectomy—Initial results of single-institution pilot study. Urology, 2005; 65:1086–1089.
46.
NazemiT, GalichA, SterrettS, et al.Radical nephrectomy performed by open, laparoscopy with or without hand-assistance or robotic methods by the same surgeon produces comparable perioperative results. Int Braz J Urol, 2006; 32:15–22.
47.
HelmersMR, BallMW, GorinMA, et al.Robotic versus laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: Comparative analysis and cost considerations. Can J Urol, 2016; 23:8435–8440.
48.
BogerM, LucasSM, PoppSC, et al.Comparison of robot-assisted nephrectomy with laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy. JSLS, 2010; 14:374–380.
49.
HemalAK, KumarA. A prospective comparison of laparoscopic and robotic radical nephrectomy for T1-2N0M0 renal cell carcinoma. World J Urol, 2009; 27:89–94.
50.
JeongIG, KhandwalaYS, KimJH, et al.Association of robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic radical nephrectomy with perioperative outcomes and health care costs, 2003 to 2015. JAMA, 2017; 318:1561–1568.
51.
LukACO, PandianRMK, HeerR: Laparoscopic renal surgery is here to stay. Arab J Urol, 2019; 16:314–320.
52.
BishoffJT, AllafME, KirkelsW, et al.Laparoscopic bowel injury: Incidence and clinical presentation. J Urol, 1999; 161:887–890.
53.
PermpongkosolS, LinkRE, SuL-M, et al.Complications of 2,775 urological laparoscopic procedures: 1993 to 2005. J Urol, 2007; 177:580–585.
54.
BredaA, FinelliA, JanetschekG, et al.Complications of laparoscopic surgery for renal masses: Prevention, management, and comparison with the open experience. Eur Urol, 2009; 55:836–850.
55.
AronM, ColomboJR, TurnaB, et al.Diaphragmatic repair and/or reconstruction during upper abdominal urological laparoscopy. J Urol, 2007; 178:2444–2450.
McAlpineK, BreauRH, KneeC, et al.Venous thromboembolism and transfusion after major abdominopelvic surgery. Surgery, 2019; 166:1084–1091.
58.
MikhailD, KreshoverJ, RichstoneL. Minimally Invasive Urology, An Essential Clinical Guide to Endourology, Laparoscopy, LESS and Robotics. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature Switzerland AG, 2019, pp. 13–26.
