Partial nephrectomy versus radical nephrectomy in patients with small renal tumors--is there a difference in mortality and cardiovascular outcomes?

Department of Urology, New York University Medical Center, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
The Journal of urology (Impact Factor: 3.75). 11/2008; 181(1):55-61; discussion 61-2. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.09.017
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Compared with partial nephrectomy, radical nephrectomy increases the risk of chronic kidney disease, which is a significant risk factor for cardiovascular events and death. Given equivalent oncological efficacy in patients with small renal tumors, radical nephrectomy may result in overtreatment. We analyzed a population based cohort of patients to determine whether radical nephrectomy is associated with an increase in cardiovascular events and mortality compared with partial nephrectomy.
Using Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results cancer registry data linked with Medicare claims we identified 2,991 patients older than 66 years who were treated with radical or partial nephrectomy for renal tumors 4 cm or less between 1995 and 2002. The primary end points of cardiovascular events and overall survival were assessed using Kaplan-Meier survival estimation, Cox proportional hazards regression and negative binomial regression.
A total of 2,547 patients (81%) underwent radical nephrectomy and 556 (19%) underwent partial nephrectomy. During a median followup of 4 years 609 patients experienced a cardiovascular event and 892 died. When adjusting for preoperative demographic and comorbid variables, radical nephrectomy was associated with an increased risk of overall mortality (HR 1.38, p <0.01) and a 1.4 times greater number of cardiovascular events after surgery (p <0.05). However, radical nephrectomy was not significantly associated with time to first cardiovascular event (HR 1.21, p = 0.10) or with cardiovascular death (HR 0.95, p = 0.84).
Radical nephrectomy, which is currently the most common treatment for small renal tumors, may be associated with significant, adverse treatment effects compared with partial nephrectomy. Partial nephrectomy should be considered in most patients with small renal tumors.

Download full-text


Available from: Thomas L Jang, Jun 28, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study aimed to evaluate the overall survival (OS) rate and renal function after radical nephrectomy (RN) and partial nephrectomy (PN) in patients aged ⩾65years. Patients who underwent RN (n=622) or PN (n=622) for renal cell carcinoma (pT1N0M0) between 1999 and 2011 were propensity-score matched in our multicentre database. To investigate the relative effect of PN on OS according to age, we divided the patients into two age subgroups (<65 and ⩾65years). The 5-year OS rates and probabilities of freedom from chronic kidney disease (CKD III or IV) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and separate Cox proportional hazards models. The 5-year OS rates after surgery were 94.7% for PN and 91.9% for RN in the older patients (P=0.698). The corresponding rates in the younger patients were 99.7% for PN and 96.3% for RN (P=0.015). In separate Cox hazards models for OS, the older patients who underwent PN were not significantly different from their RN-treated counterparts (hazard ratio (HR): 0.960; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.277-2.321, P=0.797). Kidney function was significantly better preserved after PN than after RN at all ages. However, stage IV CKD in the older patients did not occur more frequently in the RN arm than in the PN arm. Although PN was associated with improved renal function compared with RN, it did not confer a benefit of higher survival rate in elderly patients (⩾65yearsold). Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
    European journal of cancer (Oxford, England: 1990) 01/2015; 51(4). DOI:10.1016/j.ejca.2014.12.012 · 4.82 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives. To document the feasibility of nephron-sparing surgery (NSS) for the surgical treatment of renal masses measuring larger than 7 cm (cT2) on preoperative imaging. Methods. A total of 139 patients have undergone NSS between 2001 and 2012 by a single surgeon in our clinic. Of these, we identified 17 patients whose tumors were measuring greater than 7 cm on preoperative imaging studies and were limited to the kidney. Their charts were retrospectively reviewed. Results. Mean age of the study population was 49.8 ± 11.3 years. Thirteen patients were managed by open NSS, while 4 patients have undergone robot-assisted NSS. Mean diameter and mean R.E.N.A.L. score of the tumors that were enucleoresected were 8.2 cm and 8.5, respectively. A total of 5 Clavien grade 2 and higher complications were recorded within 30 days of surgery. Histopathologic examination revealed benign histology in almost 1/4 of the cases. After a median followup of 33 months, all of our patients were alive. Only one patient (5.8%) experienced local recurrence. Conclusions. NSS is a feasible and safe option for large (>7 cm) renal masses. It may be considered not only for imperative conditions but also for highly selected cases with a normal contralateral kidney.
    01/2013; 2013:691080. DOI:10.1155/2013/691080
  • Source
    European Urology 09/2012; 62(3):564–565. DOI:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.06.020 · 12.48 Impact Factor