Objectives: To compare the treatment of laparoscopic (LPN) versus open partial nephrectomy (OPN) in patients with multilocular cystic renal cell carcinoma (MCRCC). Methods: Thirty-seven patients diagnosed with MCRCC were reviewed retrospectively between January 2007 and January 2013 at our institution. They were divided into two groups: group 1 (LPN) consisted of 19 patients (51.4%) and group 2 (OPN) of 18 patients (48.6%). RENAL and the Preoperative Aspects and Dimensions Used for an Anatomical classification were applied to predict perioperative complications, which were graded based on the Clavien-Dindo classification. Results: The two groups were comparable with regard to all of the patients' baseline characteristics. In group 1, the mean operative time was 142.1 min, including the mean warm ischemia time (WIT) of 32.6 min; the mean estimated blood loss (EBL) was 96.1 ml, the mean retroperitoneal drainage lasted 3.6 days, and the mean postoperative hospital stay was 5.3 days. In group 2, the figures were 126.6 and 23.5 min, 223.3 ml, and 4.6 and 8.7 days, respectively. The differences in WIT, EBL, drainage days and hospitalization were statistically significant between both groups (p < 0.05). No recurrence or new lesions occurred in these patients during a mean follow-up of 37.8 months. Conclusions: Our single-center experience suggests that although it remains technically complex, demanding and challenging for MCRCC, LPN can still induce favorable perioperative results and survival rates in MCRCC are comparable with OPN.

Keywords:
Kidney neoplasm, Kidney tumor, Laparoscopy, Microsurgery, Multilocular cystic renal cell carcinoma, Open partial nephrectomy, Nephron-sparing surgery, Retroperitoneoscopy
1.
Wahal SP, Mardi K: Multilocular cystic renal cell carcinoma: a rare entity with review of literature. J Lab Physicians 2014;6:50-52.
2.
Halat SK, MacLennan GT: Multilocular cystic renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 2007;177:343-343.
3.
Han KR, Janzen NK, McWhorter VC, et al: Cystic renal cell carcinoma: biology and clinical behavior. Urol Oncol 2004;22:410-414.
4.
Suzigan S, Lopez-Beltran A, Montironi R, et al: Multilocular cystic renal cell carcinoma: a report of 45 cases of a kidney tumor of low malignant potential. Am J Clin Pathol 2006;125:217-222.
5.
Weiss SG, Hafez RG, Uehling DT: Multilocular cystic renal cell carcinoma: implications for nephron sparing surgery. Urology 1998;51:635-637.
6.
Lopez-Beltran A, Scarpelli M, Montironi R, et al: 2004 WHO classification of the renal tumors of the adults. Eur Urol 2006;49:798-805.
7.
Gong K, Zhang N, He Z, et al: Multilocular cystic renal cell carcinoma: an experience of clinical management for 31 cases. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2008;134:433-437.
8.
Nassir A, Jollimore J, Gupta R, et al: Multilocular cystic renal cell carcinoma: a series of 12 cases and review of the literature. Urology 2002;60:421-427.
9.
Finelli A, Gill IS: Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: contemporary technique and results. Urol Oncol 2004;22:139-144.
10.
Spaliviero M, Herts BR, Magi-Galluzzi C, et al: Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for cystic masses. J Urol 2005;174:614-619.
11.
Xu B, Zhang Q, Jin J: Hypertension secondary to reninoma treated with laparoscopic nephron-sparing surgery in a child. Urology 2012;80:210-213.
12.
Eble JN, Bonsib SM: Extensively cystic renal neoplasms: cystic nephroma, cystic partially differentiated nephroblastoma, multilocular cystic renal cell carcinoma, and cystic hamartoma of renal pelvis. Semin Diagn Pathol 1998;15:2-20.
13.
Ljungberg B, Cowan NC, Hanbury DC, et al: EAU guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: the 2010 update. Eur Urol 2010;58:398-406.
14.
Springer C, Hoda MR, Fajkovic H, et al: Laparoscopic vs open partial nephrectomy for T1 renal tumours: evaluation of long-term oncological and functional outcomes in 340 patients. BJU Int 2013;111:281-288.
15.
Porpiglia F, Volpe A, Billia M, et al: Laparoscopic versus open partial nephrectomy: analysis of the current literature. Eur Urol 2008;53:732-742.
16.
Minervini A, Siena G, Antonelli A, et al: Open versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for clinical T1a renal masses: a matched-pair comparison of 280 patients with TRIFECTA outcomes (Record Project). World J Urol 2014;32:257-263.
17.
Lane BR, Russo P, Uzzo RG, et al: Comparison of cold and warm ischemia during partial nephrectomy in 660 solitary kidneys reveals predominant role of nonmodifiable factors in determining ultimate renal function. J Urol 2011;185:421-427.
18.
Simmons MN, Fergany AF, Campbell SC: Effect of parenchymal volume preservation on kidney function after partial nephrectomy. J Urol 2011;186:405-410.
19.
Marszalek M, Meixl H, Polajnar M, et al: Laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy: a matched-pair comparison of 200 patients. Eur Urol 2009;55:1171-1178.
20.
Chan AA, Wood CG, Caicedo J, et al: Predictors of unilateral renal function after open and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Urology 2010;75:295-302.
21.
Ren T, Liu Y, Zhao X, et al: Transperitoneal approach versus retroperitoneal approach: a meta-analysis of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. PLoS One 2014;9:e91978.
© 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel
2014
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.