Abstract
Abstract
Background:
We aimed to assess the long-term oncologic outcome of hand-assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (HLRN) compared with open radical nephrectomy (ORN) in patients with clinically localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC).
Patients and Methods:
We retrospectively reviewed the data from 1098 patients who underwent radical nephrectomy at five institutions in Korea between 2000 and 2011 for clinically localized RCC. One hundred ninety-seven patients in the HLRN group were compared with 901 patients in the ORN group. Univariate and multivariate analysis assessed the effects of operative method on oncologic outcomes.
Results:
The median duration of follow-up was 69 months for the HLRN group and 63 months for the ORN group. No statistically significant difference was found in the operative time (170.2 minutes versus 168.9 minutes, P=.793) between the HLRN and ORN groups. However, estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the HLRN group than in the ORN group (245.9 mL versus 422.4 mL, P<.001). The pathological T stage was significantly higher in patients in the ORN group: 79.9% of patients in the HLRN group derived from pT1, versus 54.7% of those in the ORN group (P<.001). A statistically significant difference was found in the 5-year disease-free (90.6% versus 79.6%, P<.001), cancer-specific (95.7% versus 91.1%, P=.019), and overall (93.4% versus 85.4%, P<.001) survival between the HLRN and ORN groups. However, multivariate analysis by Cox's proportional hazards model does not retain surgical methods as an independent predictive factor for cancer-related death or recurrence.
Conclusions:
HLRN may be a preferable minimally invasive surgical treatment for clinically localized RCC with comparable long-term oncologic outcomes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.