Objective: This study aimed to evaluate oncological and functional outcomes of nephron- sparing surgery by comparing open and laparoscopic approaches in a consecutive series of patients with intermediate and high complexity renal masses.
Materials and methods: We retrospectively reviewed all nephron-sparing surgery cases in 2 referral centers from January 2013 to January 2020. Tumor complexity was graded according to radius exophytic/endophytic nearness anterior/posterior location nephrometry score. Patients with a single kidney tumor with a radius exophytic/endophytic nearness anterior/posterior location score ≥ 7 were evaluated. Exclusion criteria were solitary kidney, multiple/bilateral tumors, and a low radius exophytic/endophytic nearness Anterior/Posterior location score (<7). Patients were divided according to the surgical approach: the laparoscopic tumor enucleation and the open wedge resection groups. The Trifecta and Pentafecta score achievement rates were assessed.
Results: Two hundred thirteen patients were included in the analysis, 76 in laparoscopic tumor enucleation group and 137 in the open wedge resection group. There were no statistically significant differences in preoperative data between laparoscopic tumor enucleation and open wedge resection groups, except for the higher percentage of T1a masses in the latter group. The mean 24-hour blood loss and length of stay were higher in the open wedge resection group. Minor and major postoperative complication rates were comparable. No significant difference in terms of the Trifecta score was reported. Pentafecta score was achieved in 35/76 (46.1%) and 61/137 (44.5%) cases in the laparoscopic tumor enucleation and open wedge resection groups, respectively.
Conclusion: Our study showed that laparoscopic tumor enucleation was associated with significantly lower blood and length of stay. Postoperative complications and the achievement of the Pentafecta score were similar in both surgical approaches.