» Articles » PMID: 34178668

Partial Nephrectomy Versus Radical Nephrectomy for Clinical T2 or Higher Stage Renal Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Overview
Journal Front Oncol
Specialty Oncology
Date 2021 Jun 28
PMID 34178668
Citations 11
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: The choice of surgical method for clinically diagnosed T2 or higher stage kidney cancer remains controversial. Here, we systematically reviewed and collected published comparative studies on renal function, oncologic outcomes, and perioperative results of partial nephrectomy (PN) versus radical nephrectomy (RN) for larger renal tumors (T2 and above), and performed a meta-analysis.

Evidence Acquisition: Following searches of PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase, the original studies on PN vs. RN in the treatment of T2 renal cancer were screened through strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. RevMan 5.4 was used for data analysis of the perioperative results, renal function, and oncologic outcomes of the two surgical methods for T2 renal tumor therapy. The weighted mean difference was used as the combined effect size for continuous variables, while the odds ratio (OR) or risk ratio (RR) was used as the combined effect size for binary variables. Both variables used a 95% confidence interval (CI) to estimate statistical accuracy. In cases with low heterogeneity, the fixed-effects model was used to pool the estimated value; otherwise, the random-effects model was used when significant heterogeneity was detected.

Results: Fifteen retrospective studies including 5,056 patients who underwent nephrectomy (PN: 1975, RN: 3081) were included. The decline in estimated GFR (eGFR) after PN was lower than RN [(MD: -11.74 ml/min/1.73 m; 95% CI: -13.15, -10.32; p < 0.00001)]. The postoperative complication rate of PN was higher than that of PN (OR: 2.09; 95% CI: 1.56, 2.80; p < 0.00001)], and the postoperative overall survival (OS) of PN was higher than that of RN (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.65, 0.90; p = 0.002), and tumor recurrence (RR, 0.69; 95% CI: 0.53, 0.90; p = 0.007). No obvious publication bias was found in the funnel chart of the OS rates of the two groups of patients.

Conclusions: PN is beneficial for patients with T2 renal tumors in terms of OS and renal function protection. However, it is also associated with a higher risk of surgical complications.

Citing Articles

Comparing oncologic outcomes of partial and radical nephrectomy for T2 renal cell carcinoma: a propensity score matching cohort study and an external multicenter validation.

Mao W, Wu T, Barge S, Zubair M, Sanchez D, Geng J World J Urol. 2025; 43(1):166.

PMID: 40072570 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-025-05561-0.


Targeting the Adenosine A2A Receptor as a Novel Therapeutic Approach for Renal Cell Carcinoma: Mechanisms and Clinical Trial Review.

Chen T, Chang Y, Yu C, Sung W Pharmaceutics. 2024; 16(9).

PMID: 39339165 PMC: 11434806. DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics16091127.


Comparison of Outcomes Between Partial and Radical Laparoscopic Nephrectomy for Localized Renal Tumors Larger Than Four Centimeters: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Dong B, Song J, Yang W, Zhan H, Luan T, Wang J World J Oncol. 2024; 15(4):625-639.

PMID: 38993256 PMC: 11236382. DOI: 10.14740/wjon1866.


Clear cell likelihood score may improve diagnosis and management of renal masses.

Salles-Silva E, Lima E, Amorim V, Milito M, Parente D Abdom Radiol (NY). 2024; 49(12):4494-4506.

PMID: 38900323 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-024-04415-4.


Differential effects of obesity on perioperative outcomes in renal cell carcinoma patients based on race and ethnicity and neighborhood-level socioeconomic status.

Asif W, Paster I, Pulling K, Garcia K, Wightman P, Cruz A Transl Androl Urol. 2024; 13(4):548-559.

PMID: 38721286 PMC: 11074675. DOI: 10.21037/tau-23-421.


References
1.
van Poppel H, Da Pozzo L, Albrecht W, Matveev V, Bono A, Borkowski A . A prospective, randomised EORTC intergroup phase 3 study comparing the oncologic outcome of elective nephron-sparing surgery and radical nephrectomy for low-stage renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol. 2010; 59(4):543-52. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.12.013. View

2.
Reix B, Bernhard J, Patard J, Bigot P, Villers A, Suer E . Overall survival and oncological outcomes after partial nephrectomy and radical nephrectomy for cT2a renal tumors: A collaborative international study from the French kidney cancer research network UroCCR. Prog Urol. 2018; 28(3):146-155. PMC: 9084631. DOI: 10.1016/j.purol.2017.12.004. View

3.
Hozo S, Djulbegovic B, Hozo I . Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2005; 5:13. PMC: 1097734. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-5-13. View

4.
Rinott Mizrahi G, Freifeld Y, Klein I, Boyarsky L, Zreik R, Orlin I . Comparison of Partial and Radical Laparascopic Nephrectomy: Perioperative and Oncologic Outcomes for Clinical T2 Renal Cell Carcinoma. J Endourol. 2018; 32(10):950-954. DOI: 10.1089/end.2018.0199. View

5.
Hamilton Z, Capitanio U, Lane B, Larcher A, Yim K, Dey S . Should partial nephrectomy be considered "elective" in patients with stage 2 chronic kidney disease? A comparative analysis of functional and survival outcomes after radical and partial nephrectomy. World J Urol. 2019; 37(11):2429-2437. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-019-02650-9. View