IMEMR
EMRO
66.92
Index Copernicus
ICICICICICICICIC
Volume 2, Issue 1 (2021)
J Clinic Care Skill 2021, 2(1): 45-49 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rabani S, Mousavizadeh A, Rabani S. Open Partial Nephrectomy without Ischemia; Case Series. J Clinic Care Skill 2021; 2 (1) :45-49
URL: http://jccs.yums.ac.ir/article-1-74-en.html
URL: http://jccs.yums.ac.ir/article-1-74-en.html
1- Beheshti Teaching Hospital, Yasuj University of Medical Sciences, Yasuj, Iran , rabani.smr@yums.ac.ir
2- Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Yasuj University of Medical Sciences, Yasuj, Iran
3- Cellular and Molecular Research center, Yasuj University of Medical Sciences, Yasuj, Iran
2- Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Yasuj University of Medical Sciences, Yasuj, Iran
3- Cellular and Molecular Research center, Yasuj University of Medical Sciences, Yasuj, Iran
Abstract: (1024 Views)
Aims: Renal vascular clamping during partial nephrectomy can lead to renal ischemia and kidney damage due to reperfusion injuries, but a surgical technique without any ischemia can eliminate such unwanted effects on kidney function. The present study aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of partial nephrectomy in conditions where the renal artery is ready to be clamped.
Patient Information: In this case series study, 24 eligible patients with small solitary renal masses were included in the study between 2013 and 2018. The option of surgery was open partial nephrectomy. During the time corresponding to the hilar clamping in standard techniques, the renal artery was exposed and ready for clamping if needed, and in this situation, resecting the mass was carried out.
Findings: The mean tumor resection time was 22.08±2.50 minutes, and the mean procedure time was 92.00±4.60 minutes. Clear cell renal cell carcinoma was seen in 19 patients, papillary renal cell carcinoma in 3, and oncocytoma in 2 patients. There was no positive surgical margin in specimens with cancer. Lower pole, mid zone, and upper pole masses were observed in 14, 2, and 8 cases, respectively.
Conclusion: Although this technique can potentially be a dangerous procedure, in a situation in which the renal artery is well exposed and ready to be controlled, especially when the tumor is in Polar Regions, the mass resection can be safely done without any type of ischemia. Therefore, this procedure can be suggested as a viable one in comparison with other related procedures.
Patient Information: In this case series study, 24 eligible patients with small solitary renal masses were included in the study between 2013 and 2018. The option of surgery was open partial nephrectomy. During the time corresponding to the hilar clamping in standard techniques, the renal artery was exposed and ready for clamping if needed, and in this situation, resecting the mass was carried out.
Findings: The mean tumor resection time was 22.08±2.50 minutes, and the mean procedure time was 92.00±4.60 minutes. Clear cell renal cell carcinoma was seen in 19 patients, papillary renal cell carcinoma in 3, and oncocytoma in 2 patients. There was no positive surgical margin in specimens with cancer. Lower pole, mid zone, and upper pole masses were observed in 14, 2, and 8 cases, respectively.
Conclusion: Although this technique can potentially be a dangerous procedure, in a situation in which the renal artery is well exposed and ready to be controlled, especially when the tumor is in Polar Regions, the mass resection can be safely done without any type of ischemia. Therefore, this procedure can be suggested as a viable one in comparison with other related procedures.
Article Type: Original Research |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2019/10/25 | Accepted: 2020/07/21 | Published: 2021/01/20
Received: 2019/10/25 | Accepted: 2020/07/21 | Published: 2021/01/20
References
1. Thompson RH, Siddiqui S, Lohse CM, Leibovich BC, Russo P, Blute ML. Partial versus radical nephrectomy for 4 to 7 cm renal cortical tumors. J Urol. 2009;182(6):2601-6. [DOI:10.1016/j.juro.2009.08.087] [PMID] [PMCID]
2. Huang WC, Elkin EB, Levey AS, Jang TL, Russo P. Partial nephrectomy versus radical nephrectomy in patients with small renal tumors-is there a difference in mortality and cardiovascular outcomes?. J Urol. 2009;181(1):55-61. [DOI:10.1016/j.juro.2008.09.017] [PMID] [PMCID]
3. Patard JJ, Shvarts O, Lam JS, Pantuck AJ, Kim HL, Ficarra V, et al. Safety and efficacy of partial nephrectomy for all T1 tumors based on an international multicenter experience. J Urol. 2004;171(6 Pt 1):2181-5. [DOI:10.1097/01.ju.0000124846.37299.5e] [PMID]
4. Campbell S, Uzzo RG, Allaf ME, Bass EB, Cadeddu JA, Chang A, et al. Renal mass and localized renal cancer: AUA guideline. J Urol. 2017;198(3):520-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.juro.2017.04.100] [PMID]
5. Hung AJ, Cai J, Simmons MN, Gill IS. Trifecta in partial nephrectomy. J Urol. 2013;189(1):36-42. [DOI:10.1016/j.juro.2012.09.042] [PMID]
6. Hammett J, Crispen PL, Ko J, Byrd N, Bylund JR, Schenkman NS, et al. Regional trends of renal mass management in the southeast. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(15):16562. [DOI:10.1200/jco.2011.29.15_suppl.e16562]
7. Kunath F, Schmidt S, Krabbe LM, Miernik A, Dahm P, Cleves A, et al. Partial nephrectomy versus radical nephrectomy for clinically localized renal masses. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;5(5):012045. [DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD012045.pub2] [PMID] [PMCID]
8. Volpe A, Blute ML, Ficarra V, Gill IS, Kutikov A, Porpiglia F, et al. Renal ischemia and function after partial nephrectomy: A collaborative review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2015;68(1):61-74. [DOI:10.1016/j.eururo.2015.01.025] [PMID]
9. Parekh DJ, Weinberg JM, Ercole B, Torkko KC, Hilton W, Bennett M, et al. Tolerance of the human kidney to isolated controlled ischemia. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013;24(3):506-17. [DOI:10.1681/ASN.2012080786] [PMID] [PMCID]
10. Lane BR, Babineau DC, Poggio ED, Weight CJ, Larson BT, Gill IS, et al. Factors predicting renal functional outcome after partial nephrectomy. J Urol. 2008;180(6):2363-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.juro.2008.08.036] [PMID]
11. Thompson RH, Frank I, Lohse CM, Saad IR, Fergany A, Zincke H, et al. The impact of ischemia time during open nephron sparing surgery on solitary kidneys: A multi-institutional study. J Urol. 2007;177(2):471-6. [DOI:10.1016/j.juro.2006.09.036] [PMID]
12. Thompson RH, Lane BR, Lohse CM, Leibovich BC, Fergany A, Frank I, et al. Every minute counts when the renal hilum is clamped during partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol. 2010;58(3):340-5. [DOI:10.1016/j.eururo.2010.05.047] [PMID]
13. Porpiglia F, Fiori C, Bertolo R, Angusti T, Piccoli GB, Podio V, et al. The effects of warm ischaemia time on renal function after laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in patients with normal contralateral kidney. World J Urol. 2012;30(2):257-63. [DOI:10.1007/s00345-011-0729-5] [PMID]
14. Funahashi Y, Hattori R, Yamamoto T, Kamihira O, Kato K, Gotoh M. Ischemic renal damage after nephron-sparing surgery in patients with normal contralateral kidney. Eur Urol. 2009;55(1):209-15. [DOI:10.1016/j.eururo.2008.07.048] [PMID]
15. Becker F, Van Poppel H, Hakenberg OW, Stief C, Gill I, Guazzoni G, et al. Assessing the impact of ischaemia time during partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol. 2009;56(4):625-35. [DOI:10.1016/j.eururo.2009.07.016] [PMID]
16. Patel AR, Eggener SE. Warm ischemia less than 30 minutes is not necessarily safe during partial nephrectomy: Every minute matters. Urol Oncol. 2011;29(6):826-8. [DOI:10.1016/j.urolonc.2011.02.015] [PMID]
17. Rezaeetalab GH, Karami H, Dadkhah F, Simforoosh N, Shakhssalim N. Laparoscopic versus open partial nephrectomy for stage T1a of renal tumors. Urol J. 2016;13(6):2903-7. [Persian]
18. Leow JJ, Heah NH, Chang SL, Chong YL, Png KS. Outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: An updated meta-analysis of 4,919 patients. J Urol. 2016;196(5):1371-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.juro.2016.06.011] [PMID]
19. Shen Z, Xie L, Xie W, Hu H, Chen T, Xing C, et al. The comparison of perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted and open partial nephrectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol. 2016;14(1):220. [DOI:10.1186/s12957-016-0971-9] [PMID] [PMCID]
20. Xia L, Wang X, Xu T, Guzzo TJ. Systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies reporting perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy versus open partial nephrectomy. J Endourol. 2017;31(9):893-909. [DOI:10.1089/end.2016.0351] [PMID]
21. Morelli L, Morelli J, Palmeri M, Disidoro C, Kauffmann EF, Tartaglia D, et al. Robotic surgery and hemostatic agents in partial nephrectomy: A high rate of success without vascular clamping. J Robot Surg. 2015;9(3):215-22. [DOI:10.1007/s11701-015-0519-y] [PMID]
22. Riggs SB, Larochelle JC, Belldegrun AS. Partial nephrectomy: A contemporary review regarding outcomes and different techniques. Cancer J. 2008;14(5):302-7. [DOI:10.1097/PPO.0b013e31818675ae] [PMID]
23. Funahashi Y, Yoshino Y, Sassa N, Matsukawa Y, Takai S, Gotoh M. Comparison of warm and cold ischemia on renal function after partial nephrectomy. Urology. 2014;84(6):1408-12. [DOI:10.1016/j.urology.2014.08.040] [PMID]
24. Huang J, Zhang J, Wang Y, Kong W, Xue W, Liu D, et al. Comparing zero ischemia laparoscopic radio frequency ablation assisted tumor enucleation and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for clinical t1a renal tumor: A randomized clinical trial. J Urol. 2016;195(6):1677-83. [DOI:10.1016/j.juro.2015.12.115] [PMID]
25. Gill IS, Patil MB, De Castro Abreu AL, Ng C, Cai J, Berger A, et al. Zero ischemia anatomical partial nephrectomy: A novel approach. J Urol. 2012;187(3):807-14. [DOI:10.1016/j.juro.2011.10.146] [PMID]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |