Fernández CG, Camean J, Jaunarena J, Chemi J, Villalba BR, Villoldo G

Language: English
References: 12
Page: 1-9
PDF size: 269.76 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective: Description of the laparoscopic approach for local recurrence of renal cell carcinoma after radical nephrectomy and oncological outcomes.
Study design: A retrospective cohort analysis.
Materials and methods: A retrospective cohort analysis included patients who underwent laparoscopic resection for RCC recurrence at XXX. The laparoscopic technique utilized either transabdominal or retroperitoneal approaches. The primary outcome measure was disease-free survival. Secondary outcome measures included operative time, estimated blood loss, and complications.
Results: Thirteen patients underwent laparoscopic resection, with a mean operative time of 189 minutes and low complication rates. Pathological reports confirmed clear-cell RCC in the majority of cases. The median time to recurrence post-nephrectomy was 67 months, with a 3-year disease-free survival rate of 85%. All patients had negative margins, and at the last follow-up all patients were alive.
Limitations: The limitations of this study include its small sample size and retrospective design.
Value: The full laparoscopic approach for patients with local recurrence of renal cell carcinoma.
Conclusion: Laparoscopic resection of locally recurrent RCC postradical nephrectomy appears to be safe and effective, demonstrating promising oncological outcomes. Larger prospective studies are warranted to validate these findings and establish standardized guidelines for widespread implementation.

REFERENCES

1. European Association of Urology. Renal CellCarcinoma. 2023

2. Ministerio de Salud de Argentina. Estadísticas -Incidencia. 2021.

3. American Cancer Society. Key Statistics AboutKidney Cancer. 2024.

4. Margulis V, McDonald M, Tamboli P, SwansonDA, Wood CG. Predictors of oncologicaloutcome after resection of locally recurrentrenal cell carcinoma. The Journal of Urology.2009;181(5): 2044–2051. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.01.043.

5. Psutka SP, Heidenreich M, Boorjian SA, BaileyGC, Cheville JC, Stewart-Merrill SB, et al. Renalfossa recurrence after nephrectomy for renal cellcarcinoma: prognostic features and oncologicaloutcomes. BJU international. 2017;119(1): 116–127. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13620.

6. Yohannan J, Feng T, Berkowitz J, ConnollySS, Pierorazio P, Allaf ME. Laparoscopicresection of local recurrence after previousradical nephrectomy for clinically localizedrenal-cell carcinoma: perioperative outcomesand initial observations. Journal of Endourology.2010;24(10): 1609–1612. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2010.0051.

7. Itano NB, Blute ML, Spotts B, Zincke H.Outcome of isolated renal cell carcinoma fossarecurrence after nephrectomy. The Journal ofUrology. 2000;164(2): 322–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67350-8.

8. Bruno JJ, Snyder ME, Motzer RJ, Russo P. Renalcell carcinoma local recurrences: impact of surgicaltreatment and concomitant metastasis on survival.BJU international. 2006;97(5): 933–938. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06076.x.

9. Master VA, Gottschalk AR, Kane C, CarrollPR. Management of isolated renal fossarecurrence following radical nephrectomy.The Journal of Urology. 2005;174(2): 473–477;discussion 477. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000165574.62188.d0.

10. Paparel P, Bigot P, Matillon X, Bensalah K,Salomon L, Baumert H, et al. Local recurrenceafter radical nephrectomy for kidney cancer:management and prediction of outcomes. amulti-institutional study. Journal of SurgicalOncology. 2014;109(2): 126–131. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.23473.

11. Fayek IS, Habashy HF, Habashy NF. Isolatedloco-regional recurrence after radicalnephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: a studyof 22 patients. Journal of the Egyptian NationalCancer Institute. 2014;26(3): 161–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnci.2014.05.003.

12. Bandi G, Wen CC, Moon TD, Nakada SY.Single center preliminary experience withhand-assisted laparoscopic resection of isolatedrenal cell carcinoma fossa recurrences. Urology.2008;71(3): 495–499; discussion 499 500.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2007.08.067.