Variation in Surgical Margin Status by Surgical Approach among Patients Undergoing Partial Nephrectomy for Small Renal Masses.

J Urol

Urology Institute, University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio; Center for Health Care Quality and Outcomes, University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio; Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio; Department of Internal Medicine, Cancer Outcomes and Public Policy Effectiveness Research Center, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut. Electronic address:

Published: December 2015

AI Article Synopsis

  • This study evaluated the surgical margin status in patients with clinical T1a renal cell carcinoma who underwent different types of partial nephrectomy (open, laparoscopic, robotic) using data from the National Cancer Database between 2010 and 2011.
  • A total of 11,587 patients were analyzed, revealing that laparoscopic and robotic approaches had significantly higher rates of positive surgical margins (8.1% and 8.7% respectively) compared to open surgery (4.9%).
  • The findings suggest that laparoscopic and robotic surgeries may pose a greater risk for positive surgical margins, prompting further research on how these margins impact long-term cancer outcomes.

Article Abstract

Purpose: We assessed the relationship of surgical margins across different surgical approaches to partial nephrectomy in patients with clinical T1a renal cell carcinoma in a population based cohort.

Materials And Methods: We used NCDB (National Cancer Database) to identify all patients who underwent partial nephrectomy for clinical T1a renal cell carcinoma (tumor size less than 4 cm) from 2010 to 2011. The primary outcome was surgical margin status in patients treated with partial nephrectomy by the open, laparoscopic or robotic approach. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was done to identify patient, hospital and surgical factors associated with positive surgical margins.

Results: Partial nephrectomy was done in 11,587 patients, including open, laparoscopic and robotic nephrectomy in 5,094 (44%), 1,681 (14%) and 4,812 (42%), respectively. Mean±SD age was 56±12 years. Overall 806 patients (7%) had positive surgical margins. The positive surgical margin prevalence was 4.9%, 8.1% and 8.7% for the open, laparoscopic and robotic approaches, respectively (p<0.001). Laparoscopic and robotic partial nephrectomy had a higher adjusted OR for positive surgical margins (OR 1.81 and 1.79, respectively, each p<0.001) than open nephrectomy. When stratified by hospital type, differences in positive surgical margin rates remained, such that patients treated at academic medical centers who underwent laparoscopic and robotic partial nephrectomy had a higher adjusted OR (1.38, p=0.074 and 1.73, p<0.001, respectively) than patients treated with open partial nephrectomy.

Conclusions: Laparoscopic and robotic partial nephrectomy is associated with higher positive surgical margin rates compared to open partial nephrectomy for clinical T1a renal cell carcinoma. The effect of margin status on long-term oncologic outcomes in this context remains to be determined.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.06.076DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

partial nephrectomy
20
surgical margin
12
open laparoscopic
12
laparoscopic robotic
12
positive surgical
12
margin status
8
surgical
8
surgical margins
8
clinical t1a
8
t1a renal
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!