Retroperitoneal laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy.

PURPOSE: We analyze the retroperitoneal approach to laparoscopic radical nephrectomy in regard to feasibility, safety, morbidity and cancer control, and compare results and outcomes in patients who underwent retroperitoneal laparoscopic or open radical nephrectomy from 1995 to 1998. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The records of 58 consecutive patients with renal cancer who underwent radical nephrectomy from 1995 through 1998 were reviewed. Of the patients 29 underwent open radical nephrectomy (group 1) and 29 underwent retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (group 2). Various parameters were compared and statistical analyses were performed. RESULTS: The 2 groups were similar in regard to age, gender and side of the tumor. Operative time was slightly shorter in group 1 (mean 121.4 versus 145 minutes in group 2, p = 0.047). Mean tumor size plus or minus standard deviation was larger in group 1 (5.71 +/- 2.01 versus 4.02 +/- 1.87 cm. in group 2). Group 2 patients had significantly less operative blood loss (mean 100.0 versus 284.5 ml. in group 1, p < 0.005) and used significantly less parenteral pain medication (p < 0.05). Postoperative hospital stay was significantly longer in group 1 (9.7 +/- 3.6 versus 4.8 +/- 2.0 days in group 2, p < 0.001), and the complication rate was higher (24 versus 8%, respectively). One group 1 patient died of renal cancer (pT2G2) after 14 months and local recurrence with hepatic metastasis occurred after 9 months in a group 2 patient with a pT3G2 tumor. CONCLUSIONS: Retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy for kidney cancer requires further assessment. It seems to have several advantages over open radical nephrectomy, and to be effective and safe for less than 50 cm. renal tumors but a risk of spillage cannot be ruled out for larger tumors.