Abstract
BACKGROUND: Open radical nephrectomy (ORN) is a practical procedure for treating patients with large renal carcinomas >10 cm in size, and few studies have focused on feasibility and safety of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN). The current study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of LRN and ORN in large renal carcinoma patients by propensity matched pair analysis. METHODS: In this cohort study, a retrospective review of radical nephrectomy data from October 2010 to October 2018 at Changhai Hospital was conducted. Patients with renal carcinomas >10 cm in size by pre-operative images were included. Patients' demographics including age, gender, body mass index (BMI), tumor size, operation time, hospitalization days, etc. were collected. Renal tumor patients undergoing LRN or ORN were match-paired by gender, BMI, age, and tumor size. Peri-operative outcomes including estimated blood loss and complications were compared. The follow-up contents included survival time, disease progression, and cause of death, and cancer-specific and progression-free survival were estimated via Kaplan-Meier curve analysis. RESULTS: Among 92 patients with clinical T2b renal masses, 37 pairs were matched. The average tumor sizes of the LRN and ORN groups were 11.37±0.30 and 11.67±0.33 cm (P=0.375), respectively. The average operating time for LRN was slightly longer (204.32±11.17 vs. 192.78±8.50 min, P=0.414). Estimated blood loss (EBL) (336.49±63.58 mL for LRN vs. 545.95±74.52 mL for ORN, P=0.036), the length of postoperative stay [6.0 (5.0-9.0) for LRN vs. 9.0 (6.0-11.5) days for ORN, P=0.015], and removal time of the drainage tube [4.0 (3.0-5.0) days for LRN vs. 5.0 (4.0-6.0) for ORN, P<0.001] were less than in the LRN group. The pathological subtype and Fuhrman grade were comparable. Both groups were followed up for a similar period, and no difference was observed in 5-year survival rates. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the conversion rates and overall complication rates, it seems that LRN for large renal carcinomas demonstrated equivalent peri-operative safety and effectiveness compared with ORN, with no adverse effects on midterm oncological outcomes.