Timing, incidence and management of delayed bleeding after partial nephrectomy in patients at risk for recurrent, bilateral, multifocal renal tumors.

INTRODUCTION: Delayed bleeding is a potentially serious complication after partial nephrectomy (PN), with reported rates of 1%-2%. Patients with multiple renal tumors, including those with hereditary forms of kidney cancer, are often managed with resection of multiple tumors in a single kidney which may increase the risk of delayed bleeding, though outcomes have not previously been reported specifically in this population. The objective of this study was to evaluate the incidence and timing of delayed bleeding as well as the impact of intervention on renal functional outcomes in a cohort primarily made up of patients at risk for bilateral, multifocal renal tumors. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of patients with known or suspected predisposition to bilateral, multifocal renal tumors who underwent PN from 2003 to 2023 was conducted. Patients who presented with delayed bleeding were identified. Patients with delayed bleeding were compared to those without. Comparative statistics and univariate logistic regression were used to determine potential risk factors for delayed bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 1256 PN were performed during the study period. Angiographic evidence of pseudoaneurysm, AV fistula and/or extravasation occurred in 24 cases (1.9%). Of these, 21 were symptomatic presenting with gross hematuria in 13 (54.2%), decreasing hemoglobin in 4(16.7%), flank pain in 2(8.3%), and mental status change in 2 (8.3%), while 3 patients were asymptomatic. Median number of resected tumors was 5 (IQR 2-8). All patients underwent angiogram with super-selective embolization. Median time to bleed event was 13.5 days (IQR 7-22). Factors associated with delayed bleeding included open approach (OR 2.2, IQR(1.06-5.46), P = 0.04 and left-sided surgery (OR 4.93, IQR(1.67-14.5), P = 0.004. Selective embolization had little impact on ultimate renal functional outcomes, with a median change of 11% from the baseline eGFR after partial nephrectomy and embolization. One patient required total nephrectomy for refractory bleeding after embolization. CONCLUSIONS: Delayed bleeding after PN in a cohort of patients with multifocal tumors is an infrequent event, with similar rates to single tumor series. Patients should be counseled regarding timing and symptoms of delayed bleeding and multidisciplinary management with interventional radiology is critical for timely diagnosis and treatment.

Comparison of Race-Based and Non-Race-Based Glomerular Filtration Rate Equations for the Assessment of Renal Functional Risk Before Nephrectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of race-based and race-neutral estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) calculators in patients undergoing kidney surgery. METHODS: Analysis of institutional kidneys surgeries from 2006-2021 was conducted. Demographics, serum creatinine (SCr), protein dipstick, and creatinine clearance (CrCl) were assessed within 1 week prior to surgery. SCr was used to calculate eGFR using 3 models: Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD), Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI 2009), and CKD-EPI 2021. Patients were classified based on Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) criteria for CKD staging and prognosis, with urine CrCl treated as benchmark for analysis. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis evaluated accuracy of eGFR calculators' binary discrimination of eGFR less than 60 mL/min. CKD stage agreement between eGFR and urine CrCl was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 554 kidney surgeries in 336 patients had necessary laboratory data for analysis. The cohort was 62% male, with a median age of 47. Within this cohort, 8.1% (n=45) were Black, and 80% (n=441) were White. glomerular filtration rate (GFR) from 24-hour urine CrCl normalized by BSA did not vary significantly from eGFR by SCr based calculators. The proportion of patients with eGFR <60 significantly differed when using Modification of Diet in Renal Disease, CKD-EPI 2009, and CKD-EPI 2021 equations when compared to CrCl (P<.001). Still, they performed equivalently in the staging of CKD, as well as in predicting GFR of less than 60, and classifying CKD prognosis of "moderately increased or higher". CONCLUSION: A race-neutral eGFR calculator can perform equivalently to established eGFR calculators, with the added benefit of mitigating biases that account for racial disparities in nephrectomy decision making.

Genetic risk assessment for hereditary renal cell carcinoma: Clinical consensus statement.

BACKGROUND: Although renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is believed to have a strong hereditary component, there is a paucity of published guidelines for genetic risk assessment. A panel of experts was convened to gauge current opinions. METHODS: A North American multidisciplinary panel with expertise in hereditary RCC, including urologists, medical oncologists, clinical geneticists, genetic counselors, and patient advocates, was convened. Before the summit, a modified Delphi methodology was used to generate, review, and curate a set of consensus questions regarding RCC genetic risk assessment. Uniform consensus was defined as ≥85% agreement on particular questions. RESULTS: Thirty-three panelists, including urologists (n = 13), medical oncologists (n = 12), genetic counselors and clinical geneticists (n = 6), and patient advocates (n = 2), reviewed 53 curated consensus questions. Uniform consensus was achieved on 30 statements in specific areas that addressed for whom, what, when, and how genetic testing should be performed. Topics of consensus included the family history criteria, which should trigger further assessment, the need for risk assessment in those with bilateral or multifocal disease and/or specific histology, the utility of multigene panel testing, and acceptance of clinician-based counseling and testing by those who have experience with hereditary RCC. CONCLUSIONS: In the first ever consensus panel on RCC genetic risk assessment, 30 consensus statements were reached. Areas that require further research and discussion were also identified, with a second future meeting planned. This consensus statement may provide further guidance for clinicians when considering RCC genetic risk assessment. LAY SUMMARY: The contribution of germline genetics to the development of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has long been recognized. However, there is a paucity of guidelines to define how and when genetic risk assessment should be performed for patients with known or suspected hereditary RCC. Without guidelines, clinicians struggle to define who requires further evaluation, when risk assessment or testing should be done, which genes should be considered, and how counseling and/or testing should be performed. To this end, a multidisciplinary panel of national experts was convened to gauge current opinion on genetic risk assessment in RCC and to enumerate a set of recommendations to guide clinicians when evaluating individuals with suspected hereditary kidney cancer.

Margin Assessment in Renal Surgery Using a Handheld Optical Coherence Tomography Probe.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the use of a handheld optical coherence tomography (OCT) probe for the evaluation of intraoperative surgical margins during partial nephrectomy (PN). METHODS: In an initial feasibility study, a radical nephrectomy specimen with a 9-cm tumor was cut into 19 sections, exposing 0 mm (n = 8), 1 mm (n = 6), and 2 mm (n = 5) gross margins. OCT was used to determine the margin width in each specimen. Second, a prospective ex vivo assessment of 15 PN tumor specimens was performed with OCT to determine margin status and to measure the attenuation coefficient of tumor and renal parenchyma. RESULTS: Median OCT margin width measurements for sectioned samples were 0 mm, 0.9 mm (range 0.7-2.9 mm), and 2.7 (range 1.65-2.8 mm) for grossly 0 mm (positive), 1 mm, and 2 mm margins, respectively. The difference between measurements from all margin groups was statistically significant (P <.04). The sensitivity and specificity for identifying positive margins were both 100%. In the PN specimens, OCT correctly found that all specimens had negative margins (within <.0001). CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated the feasibility of using a handheld OCT probe to assess margins ex vivo during PN. OCT may reduce the need for intraoperative frozen section and aid in minimizing parenchymal excision.

Robotic versus laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: comparative analysis and cost considerations.

INTRODUCTION: Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (RRN) is an increasing utilized alternative to laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN); however, there is a little data on comparative effectiveness and cost of these procedures. We analyzed perioperative outcomes and hospital charge difference among patients undergoing laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) and robotic radical nephrectomy (RRN). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our institutional renal mass registry was queried for patients who underwent either LRN or RRN from 2010 to 2014. Demographic, perioperative outcomes and hospital charge data were compared between surgical approaches. RESULTS: Overall, 319 minimally invasive radical nephrectomies were performed during the study period. Of these, 243 were LRN and 76 were RRN. Patient demographic and tumor characteristics were similar between groups. Among operative characteristics, operative time (136 min versus 139 min, p = 0.531), intraoperative complications (2.8% versus 2.0%, p = 0.650), and length of stay (2 days versus 2 days, p = 0.745) were similar for LRN and RRN, respectively. Estimated blood loss (50 mL versus 100 mL, p = 0.041) and rate of conversion to an alternative surgical approach (1.0% versus 11.1%, p < 0.001) were higher in RRN. RRN cases were also more likely to include lymph node dissection (12.6% versus 24.2%, p = 0.031). Total charges trended higher for RRN but did not meet traditional levels of significance ($14,913 versus $16,265, p = 0.171). CONCLUSIONS: RRN appears to be a clinically equivalent alternative to LRN with similar perioperative outcomes, albeit at greater hospital charges.

The financial impact of robotic technology for partial and radical nephrectomy.

PURPOSE: We sought to evaluate the financial impact of robotic technology for partial nephrectomy (PN) and radical nephrectomy (RN) in the state of Maryland. METHODS: The Maryland Health Services Cost Review Commission (HSCRC) documents all acute care hospital charges data. This database was queried for patients who underwent laparoscopic or robot-assisted RN and PN from 2008 to 2012. Total hospital charge, subcharge, and length of stay (LOS) were analyzed separately for RN and PN. RESULTS: Overall, 2834 patients were identified. Of those, 282 were laparoscopic PN (LPN), 1078 robot-assisted PN (RPN), 1098 laparoscopic RN (LRN), and 376 robot-assisted RN (RRN). For PN, the total hospital charge was $19,062 for LPN and $18,255 for RPN (P=0.138), with a charge savings of $807 per case in favor of robotics. For RN, the total hospital charge was $23,391 for RRN and $18,280 for LRN (P=0.004), with a charge premium of $5111 for robotic cases. LOS was shorter for RPN compared with LPN (2.51 vs 2.99 days, P<0.0001) and for RRN compared with LRN (3.52 vs 3.98, P=0.0498). CONCLUSIONS: RPN is associated with lower hospital charges than LPN, while RRN is associated with higher hospital charges than LRN. Savings for RPN are driven by decreased room and board charge, while the premium for RRN is driven by higher operating room and supply charges. Because RRN use is increasing, the financial implications of RRN use for routine cases warrants further study.