Comparison of safety and effectiveness between retroperitoneal laparoscopic tumor aspiration and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in the treatment of renal angiomyolipoma.
- Author:
Ben XU
1
,
2
,
3
;
Zhe Nan ZHANG
1
,
2
,
3
;
Cheng LUO
1
,
2
,
3
;
Hai Feng SONG
1
,
2
,
3
;
Qian ZHANG
1
,
2
,
3
Author Information
1. Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital
2. Institute of Urology, Peking University
3. National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH:
Angiomyolipoma/surgery*;
Humans;
Kidney Neoplasms/surgery*;
Laparoscopy;
Neoplasm Recurrence, Local;
Nephrectomy;
Retrospective Studies;
Treatment Outcome
- From:
Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences)
2018;50(4):700-704
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE:To compare the safety and treatment effectiveness of retroperitoneal laparoscopic tumor aspiration and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) in the treatment of renal angiomyolipoma (RAML).
METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of patients with pathologically confirmed RAML who received operation between August 2010 and August 2016 in the Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital. Among them, a series of 121 patients were included in this trial according to the inclusion criteria, of which 74 cases could be collected and followed-up effectively. Based on the detailed surgical route, the 74 patients were divided into groups A and B: group A, which underwent retroperitoneal laparoscopic tumor aspiration, included 43 cases; group B, which received retroperitoneal LPN, included 31 cases. Patient demographics, intraoperative variables and postoperative outcomes were reported and compared between the groups.
RESULTS:No statistical difference was detected in both groups before the treatment. Intraoperatively, the mean estimated blood loss was 48.7 mL in group A and 102.9 mL in group B, and the mean operative time was 70.1 min (21.2 min of warm ischemia time included) in group A and 103.6 min (28.5 min of warm ischemia time included) in group B, which were both statistically different. In group A, no complications occurred and yet 2 complications of transfusion and 1 complication of urine leakage were discovered in group B, although all finally recovered only with conservative treatment. A statistical difference was observed in the complication rates. Post-operatively, the mean serum creatinine level was 1.13 mg/dL in group A, and the level was 1.08 mg/dL in group B, in which no evident difference was detected. In a mean 52.6-months' follow-up, a recurrence of 3 cases in group A (7.0%) and a recurrence of 2 cases in group B (6.5%) were reported. No evident difference was also detected between the groups in the tumor recurrence rates.
CONCLUSION:Due to the improvements in the intraoperative blood loss and operative time, retroperitoneal laparoscopic tumor aspiration may be provided with more potential advantages in the safety, also with equal efficacy of lower tumor recurrence rates when compared with the traditional retroperitoneal LPN in the treatment of RAML.
