Bao Nan Dong, Jie Song, Wen Li Yang, Hui Zhan, Ting Luan, Jian Song Wang
{"title":"局部和根治性腹腔镜肾切除术治疗大于四厘米的局部肾肿瘤的疗效比较:系统回顾与元分析》。","authors":"Bao Nan Dong, Jie Song, Wen Li Yang, Hui Zhan, Ting Luan, Jian Song Wang","doi":"10.14740/wjon1866","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Earlier studies have juxtaposed different laparoscopic methods for treating renal tumors; however, extensive evidence with a particular focus on large kidney tumors remains lacking. The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the perioperative outcomes, kidney performance, and cancer-related results of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) versus laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) for treating extensive, localized, non-metastatic kidney tumors (cT1b-cT2N0M0).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched multiple databases from database inception until December 2023 for relevant studies. Selected data were analyzed with the Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager 5.4 software using a random-effects model. Outcomes were expressed as odds ratios and weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals, considering a P value of < 0.05 as significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data from nine studies encompassing 1,303 patients (529 LPN, 774 LRN) revealed that LPN was associated with lengthier surgeries and increased blood loss compared to LRN. While LPN exhibited higher postoperative complication rates, the disparity did not reach statistical significance. LPN led to improved postoperative renal function, manifesting as a reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decline and fewer incidents of new chronic kidney disease cases. Both groups demonstrated comparable tumor recurrence and overall mortality rates, but LPN exhibited significantly lower cancer-specific mortality rates.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>LPN, despite longer operative times and greater intraoperative blood loss, was found to be superior to LRN in preserving postoperative renal function. Oncologically, LPN and LRN have comparable overall mortality rates, but LPN showed a significant advantage in terms of lower cancer-specific mortality rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":46797,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11236382/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Outcomes Between Partial and Radical Laparoscopic Nephrectomy for Localized Renal Tumors Larger Than Four Centimeters: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Bao Nan Dong, Jie Song, Wen Li Yang, Hui Zhan, Ting Luan, Jian Song Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.14740/wjon1866\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Earlier studies have juxtaposed different laparoscopic methods for treating renal tumors; however, extensive evidence with a particular focus on large kidney tumors remains lacking. The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the perioperative outcomes, kidney performance, and cancer-related results of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) versus laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) for treating extensive, localized, non-metastatic kidney tumors (cT1b-cT2N0M0).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched multiple databases from database inception until December 2023 for relevant studies. Selected data were analyzed with the Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager 5.4 software using a random-effects model. Outcomes were expressed as odds ratios and weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals, considering a P value of < 0.05 as significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data from nine studies encompassing 1,303 patients (529 LPN, 774 LRN) revealed that LPN was associated with lengthier surgeries and increased blood loss compared to LRN. While LPN exhibited higher postoperative complication rates, the disparity did not reach statistical significance. LPN led to improved postoperative renal function, manifesting as a reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decline and fewer incidents of new chronic kidney disease cases. Both groups demonstrated comparable tumor recurrence and overall mortality rates, but LPN exhibited significantly lower cancer-specific mortality rates.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>LPN, despite longer operative times and greater intraoperative blood loss, was found to be superior to LRN in preserving postoperative renal function. Oncologically, LPN and LRN have comparable overall mortality rates, but LPN showed a significant advantage in terms of lower cancer-specific mortality rates.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46797,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Journal of Oncology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11236382/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Journal of Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14740/wjon1866\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14740/wjon1866","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of Outcomes Between Partial and Radical Laparoscopic Nephrectomy for Localized Renal Tumors Larger Than Four Centimeters: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Background: Earlier studies have juxtaposed different laparoscopic methods for treating renal tumors; however, extensive evidence with a particular focus on large kidney tumors remains lacking. The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the perioperative outcomes, kidney performance, and cancer-related results of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) versus laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) for treating extensive, localized, non-metastatic kidney tumors (cT1b-cT2N0M0).
Methods: We systematically searched multiple databases from database inception until December 2023 for relevant studies. Selected data were analyzed with the Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager 5.4 software using a random-effects model. Outcomes were expressed as odds ratios and weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals, considering a P value of < 0.05 as significant.
Results: Data from nine studies encompassing 1,303 patients (529 LPN, 774 LRN) revealed that LPN was associated with lengthier surgeries and increased blood loss compared to LRN. While LPN exhibited higher postoperative complication rates, the disparity did not reach statistical significance. LPN led to improved postoperative renal function, manifesting as a reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decline and fewer incidents of new chronic kidney disease cases. Both groups demonstrated comparable tumor recurrence and overall mortality rates, but LPN exhibited significantly lower cancer-specific mortality rates.
Conclusions: LPN, despite longer operative times and greater intraoperative blood loss, was found to be superior to LRN in preserving postoperative renal function. Oncologically, LPN and LRN have comparable overall mortality rates, but LPN showed a significant advantage in terms of lower cancer-specific mortality rates.
期刊介绍:
World Journal of Oncology, bimonthly, publishes original contributions describing basic research and clinical investigation of cancer, on the cellular, molecular, prevention, diagnosis, therapy and prognosis aspects. The submissions can be basic research or clinical investigation oriented. This journal welcomes those submissions focused on the clinical trials of new treatment modalities for cancer, and those submissions focused on molecular or cellular research of the oncology pathogenesis. Case reports submitted for consideration of publication should explore either a novel genomic event/description or a new safety signal from an oncolytic agent. The areas of interested manuscripts are these disciplines: tumor immunology and immunotherapy; cancer molecular pharmacology and chemotherapy; drug sensitivity and resistance; cancer epidemiology; clinical trials; cancer pathology; radiobiology and radiation oncology; solid tumor oncology; hematological malignancies; surgical oncology; pediatric oncology; molecular oncology and cancer genes; gene therapy; cancer endocrinology; cancer metastasis; prevention and diagnosis of cancer; other cancer related subjects. The types of manuscripts accepted are original article, review, editorial, short communication, case report, letter to the editor, book review.