These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Long-Term Outcome of Nephron-Sparing Surgery Compared to Radical Nephrectomy for Renal Cell Carcinoma ≥4 cm - A Matched-Pair Single Institution Analysis.
    Author: Kalogirou C, Fender H, Muck P, Hey V, Krebs M, Riedmiller H, Vergho D.
    Journal: Urol Int; 2017; 98(2):138-147. PubMed ID: 27505105.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: We investigated the long-term oncological and functional outcome of nephron-sparing surgery/partial nephrectomy (PN) versus radical nephrectomy (RN) for any renal cell carcinoma (RCC) ≥4 cm. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1997 and 2013, we identified 128 patients undergoing PN for RCC ≥4 cm and matched this collective to 128 patients undergoing RN. We then compared overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), progression-free survival (PFS) and functional parameters in both groups. The median follow-up time was 58 months (3-210 months). RESULTS: Compared to RN, patients with a PN showed a significantly higher 10-year OS (77.0 vs. 63.0%, p = 0.04), CSS (90.6 vs. 71.7%, p = 0.002) and PFS (82.9 vs. 57.4%, p ≤ 0.001). Renal function preservation was better in the PN group (24 months estimated glomerular filtration rate: 68.2 ml/min for PN vs. 40.6 ml/min for RN, p ≤ 0.01) with significantly less new onset chronic kidney diseases. Total complication rate was comparable, whereas PN procedures showed more Clavien-Dindo grade I + II complications, portraying the technical challenge of PN in larger RCCs. CONCLUSIONS: Whenever feasible, PN should be considered for renal masses ≥4 cm, as this technique shows better long-term results regarding disease-specific survival and renal function preservation in our study group.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]