Comparison of efficacy and safety between two different methods of nephroureterectomy in two centers.
10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2019.04.009
- Author:
Jin Feng WU
1
;
Rong Cheng LIN
2
,
3
,
4
;
You Cheng LIN
1
;
Wang Hai CAI
1
;
Qing Guo ZHU
1
;
Dong FANG
2
,
3
,
4
;
Geng Yan XIONG
2
,
3
,
4
;
Lei ZHANG
2
,
3
,
4
;
Li Qun ZHOU
2
,
3
,
4
;
Lie Fu YE
1
;
Xue Song LI
2
,
3
,
4
Author Information
1. Department of Urology, Provincial Clinical Medical College of Fujian Medical University, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fujian Provicial Jinshan Hospital,Fuzhou, 350001, China.
2. Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital
3. Institute of Urology, Peking University
4. National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH:
Carcinoma, Transitional Cell;
Humans;
Nephrectomy;
Nephroureterectomy;
Retrospective Studies;
Treatment Outcome;
Urologic Neoplasms
- From:
Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences)
2019;51(4):646-652
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE:To compare the efficacy and safety of complete transperitoneal laparoscopic nephroureterectomy (CTNU) and traditional retroperitoneoscopic nehroureterectomy (TRNU) for the management of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma(UTUC).
METHODS:We retrospectively collected the clinical data of UTUC patients who underwent CTNU or TRNU surgery from January 2011 to December 2018 in Peking University First Hospital and Fujian Provincial Hospital, and compared the clinical characteristics, perioperative parameters, and follow-up results between the CTNU and TRNU surgeries.
RESULTS:Finally, a total of 266 cases were included, with 94 cases in the CTNU group and 172 cases in the TRNU group. The proportion of left side lesions was bigger in TRNU group when compared with CTNU group (P<0.05). No significant differences were observed in clinical characteristics, such as age, gender, body mass index (BMI), American society of anesthesiologists score (ASA score) and tumor laterality. All surgery procedures were completed. The vascular resparing was performed by reason that left arteria renalis was injured accidently during surgical operation in one case of TRNU group. No serious complications were observed in both CTNU and TRNU groups. In CTNU group, operating time was (202.9±76.7) min, estimated blood loss was (68.4±73.3) mL, drainage duration was (3.9±1.5) d, drainage volume was (181.7±251.5) mL, and postoperative hospital stay was (7.8±4.1) d. In TRNU group, operating time was (203.5±68.7) min, estimated blood loss was (130.2±252.1) mL, drainage duration was (4.3 ±1.6) d, drainage volume was (179.1±167.5) mL, and postoperative hospital stay was (8.2±3.7) d. The estimated blood loss in CTNU group was significantly less than that in TRNU group (P=0.005).The median follow-up time was 39 months (range: 1-88 months). The 5-year overall survival rate (OS), cancer specific survival rate (CSS), intra-vesical recurrence free survival rate (IvRFS), disease free survival rate (DFS) of CTNU group was 75.6%, 86.9%, 73.8%, 57.5%, respectively. The OS, CSS, IvRFS and DFS of TRNU group was 66.3%, 83.5%, 75.9%, 58.6%, respectively.No significant differences were observed in the OS, CSS, IvRFS and DFS between the CTNU and TRNU groups.
CONCLUSION:CTNU technique is a safe and effective surgical option, and further prospective randomized controlled trial is needed for further evaluation.
