Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
World J Urol ; 2019 Nov 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31701211


OBJECTIVE: Utilization of partial nephrectomy (PN) for T2 renal mass is controversial due to concerns regarding burden of morbidity, though most cited data are from open PN (OPN). We compared surgical quality and functional outcomes of RPN and OPN for clinical T2a renal masses (cT2aRM). METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 150 consecutive patients [RPN 59/OPN 91] who underwent PN from July 2008 to June 2016. Main outcome was achievement of Trifecta [negative surgical margin, no major urologic complications, and ≥90% preservation of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)]. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify factors of Trifecta attainment. RESULTS: Mean tumor size (RPN 7.9 vs. OPN 8.4 cm, p = 0.139) and median RENAL score (p = 0.361) were similar. No difference was noted for positive margins (RPN 3.4% vs. OPN 1.1%, p = 0.561), ΔeGFR (RPN - 6.2 vs. OPN - 7.8, p = 0.543), and ≥ 90% eGFR recovery (RPN 54.1% vs. OPN 47.2%, p = 0.504). RPN had lower blood loss (p = 0.015), hospital stay (p = 0.013), and Clavien ≥ 3 complications (RPN 5.1% vs. OPN 16.5%, p = 0.041). Trifecta rate was significantly higher in RPN (47.5% vs. 34.0%, p = 0.041). Multivariable analysis demonstrated decreasing RENAL score (OR 1.11, p < 0.001), RPN (OR 1.2, p = 0.013), and decreasing EBL (OR 1.02, p = 0.016) to be associated with Trifecta attainment. CONCLUSIONS: RPN provided similar functional and oncologic precision to OPN, while being associated with improvements in major complications, the latter of which was reflected in a higher rate of Trifecta achievement for RPN. RPN may be considered to be a first-line option for select patients with cT2aRM when feasible and safe.

Urol Oncol ; 37(9): 576.e17-576.e23, 2019 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31174956


INTRODUCTION: We sought to analyze the safety, efficacy, and national trends in the use of robotic radical nephrectomy (RN) and inferior vena cava thrombectomy in patients with renal cell carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed 872 patients from the National Cancer Database dataset who underwent open (n = 838, 96.1%) or robotic (n = 34, 3.9%) radical nephrectomy with inferior vena cava thrombectomy for cT3b renal cell carcinoma between 2010 and 2014. Length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmissions and 30-day mortality were compared between the 2 groups. As internal validation, we performed a multi-institutional analysis of 20 patients (9 open [45%] vs. 11 robotic [55%]) undergoing RN with a level II thrombus. Patients were compared in terms of baseline characteristics, peri- and postoperative outcomes. Uni- and multivariable models were used adjusting for clinical and tumor characteristics. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups in both datasets. In the National Cancer Database, robotic approach was associated with 26% reduction in LOS (P < 0.001) but no difference in readmissions (odds ratio [OR] = 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.05, 4.50; P = 0.925) or 30-day mortality (OR = 2.72; 95% CI = 0.40, 10.86; P = 0.211). In multicenter database, open group had significantly greater blood loss (600 vs. 100.0 mL, P = 0.020). The rate of blood transfusion was higher in the open group, but was not significant (44.4% vs. 18.2%, P = 0.336). Robotic group had a shorter LOS (1 vs. 5 days; P = 0.026). No difference was seen between the open and robotic groups in terms of operative time (226 vs. 260 minutes, P = 0.922) and postoperative complications (P > 0.999). CONCLUSION: In select cases and experienced hands, robotic approach offers a reasonable alternative to open surgery without an increased complication rate.

Urol Oncol ; 37(7): 437-444, 2019 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31103334


OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and efficacy of performing partial nephrectomy (PN) on patients with high nephrometry score tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used a prospectively maintained multi-institutional kidney cancer database to identify 144 patients with R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score ≥10 who underwent PN for a cT1-cT2 renal mass. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics, tumor characteristics, perioperative, and pathological outcomes were analyzed and reported. Trifecta achievement, defined by warm ischemia time <25 minutes, no perioperative complications, and negative surgical margins, was the primary outcome. We assessed the relationship of baseline clinical and tumor characteristics data to trifecta achievement and perioperative complications. RESULTS: Baseline median eGFR was 84.57 ml/min/1.73 m2, with 119 (84.39%) patients having normal baseline kidney function. The median clinical tumor size was 4.95 cm, with 74 (51.75%) being completely endophytic and 58 (41.73%) located on the hilum. The median ischemia time was 20 minutes. Median estimated blood loss was 150 ml. Twelve patients (8.33%) had intraoperative complications. No patient had a conversion to open surgery. Postoperative, perioperative, and major complication rate were 10.42%, 17.3%, and 2.34% respectively. Thirty-six patients (37.89%) developed postoperative acute kidney injury and 28 (20.90%) developed new-onset CKD at a median follow-up of 6 months. Eight patients (5.56%) had a positive surgical margin. Trifecta was achieved in 89 (61.81%) patients. There was no significant difference in baseline, clinical, and tumor characteristics between those that achieved trifecta and in those where trifecta was not. Pathologic tumor stage was the only factor significantly associated with trifecta achievement (P = 0.025). CONCLUSION: In treating complex renal tumors, PN should be performed when possible. Although this remains a challenging procedure, with experience and appropriate case selection, the trifecta outcome can be achieved in a significant number of patients with high renal score lesions.

Arab J Urol ; 13(4): 277-81, 2015 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26609447


OBJECTIVE: To identify patient and stricture characteristics predicting failure after direct vision internal urethrotomy (DVIU) for single and short (<2 cm) bulbar urethral strictures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analysed the records of adult patients who underwent DVIU between January 2002 and 2013. The patients' demographics and stricture characteristics were analysed. The primary outcome was procedure failure, defined as the need for regular self-dilatation (RSD), redo DVIU or substitution urethroplasty. Predictors of failure were analysed. RESULTS: In all, 430 adult patients with a mean (SD) age of 50 (15) years were included. The main causes of stricture were idiopathic followed by iatrogenic in 51.6% and 26.3% of patients, respectively. Most patients presented with obstructive lower urinary tract symptoms (68.9%) and strictures were proximal bulbar, i.e. just close to the external urethral sphincter, in 35.3%. The median (range) follow-up duration was 29 (3-132) months. In all, 250 (58.1%) patients did not require any further instrumentation, while RSD was maintained in 116 (27%) patients, including 28 (6.5%) who required a redo DVIU or urethroplasty. In 64 (6.5%) patients, a redo DVIU or urethroplasty was performed. On multivariate analysis, older age at presentation [odds ratio (OR) 1.017; P = 0.03], obesity (OR 1.664; P = 0.015), and idiopathic strictures (OR 3.107; P = 0.035) were independent predictors of failure after DVIU. CONCLUSION: The failure rate after DVIU accounted for 41.8% of our present cohort with older age at presentation, obesity, and idiopathic strictures independent predictors of failure after DVIU. This information is important in counselling patients before surgery.