Purpose: We report our experience with laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for central tumors compared to peripheral tumors to analyze the feasibility and safety of the laparoscopic approach to these complex cases.
Materials and methods: Between October 2002 and July 2007, 212 patients underwent laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. In 53 patients the tumor was central and in 159 it was peripheral. The preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative data, the type and incidence of complications, and the quality of excision in terms of surgical margin status were compared between the 2 groups.
Results: Mean estimated blood loss (320 and 360 ml, respectively, p >0.05) and mean operative time (126 and 118 minutes, respectively, p >0.05) were similar in the central and peripheral tumor groups. Mean warm ischemia time in the central tumor group was longer (37 and 28 minutes, respectively, p <0.05) but median time was similar (30 and 29 minutes, respectively, p >0.05). The open conversion rate was significantly lower in the study group (1% vs 5.6%, p <0.05). The urological complication rate was similar in the 2 groups (9.4% vs 8.4%, p >0.05). However, different types of complications developed in each group. Four patients (7.5%) with central tumors had late hematuria (arterial pseudoaneurysm) and only 1 (1.9%) had a urine leak. Central tumors were larger (3.2 vs 2.5 cm) and more frequently malignant (94% vs 82%, p >0.05). Positive surgical margins were diagnosed in 0% vs 5% of cases (p <0.05).
Conclusions: Provided that there is adequate laparoscopic expertise the outcome of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for central tumors is comparable to that of peripheral tumors. The main major complication in this group was late onset hematuria, which necessitated angiographic embolization. This facility should be available at centers where these advanced procedures are performed.