Transperitoneal Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy
No Results
No Results
processing….
The goals of this article are (1) to review the history and evolution of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) as a minimally invasive option for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), (2) to provide the surgeon with a working knowledge of laparoscopy, as well as a clear description of how to perform an LRN successfully, and (3) to answer some of the commonly asked questions concerning the application of laparoscopic techniques to the surgical control of RCC.
The techniques, instrumentation, and technologies listed in this article represent some of the available options, but not all of them. New instruments and procedures emerge weekly, and the reader is cautioned that techniques used or preferred by a certain author may or may not work in every situation. Multiple companies manufacture multiple products, and awareness of the available options is vital to improving patients’ outcomes.
The traditional technique of open radical nephrectomy includes early vascular control of the renal hilum, removal of the kidney with the Gerota fascia intact, removal of the ipsilateral adrenal gland, and a regional lymph node dissection. Although the true benefits of adrenalectomy and regional lymph dissection in all patients with RCC have been debated, the principles of early vascular control and removal of the kidney with a wide margin of Gerota fascia remain the standard of care.
In order for laparoscopic techniques to be accepted into urologic oncologic surgery, these well-established surgical principles should not be compromised. The first LRN was performed by Clayman and colleagues in 1991. [1] Since that pioneering report, the field of urologic laparoscopy has continued to expand and will be limited by only the imagination of interested urologists and the continuous improvement of instruments. Today, reliably removing the kidney is possible in a reasonable amount of time, with successful cure of the cancer. Recent LRN series have shown that patients benefit from shorter hospital stays, less pain, and an earlier return to normal activities. Furthermore, recurrence and cancer-specific survival rates appear to compare favorably with those of open surgery series.
This article focuses on the technique of transperitoneal LRN, but a discussion of the various other laparoscopic approaches is in order. Just as in open surgery, the kidney can be approached through the peritoneum or retroperitoneally. Laparoscopic urologists debate about which approach is better for the patient. Adding to this, hand-assisted surgery can now be performed with ports that allow the use of one hand in the surgical field while pneumoperitoneum is maintained.
Some reported advantages of retroperitoneal LRN include quicker access to the renal hilum, easier dissection in obese individuals, the avoidance of intraperitoneal irritation, and less interference with ventilatory and hemodynamic functions. [2] Disadvantages include difficulty in entrapping the kidney in the sack in the smaller working space (in one series, 13% of cases had to be converted to intraperitoneal for this reason) and difficulty in mastering the procedure. The transperitoneal approach has the advantages of being a very familiar approach with easily recognizable anatomy and a much larger working space. The author’s opinion is that, given these advantages, urologists beginning their laparoscopic experience should choose the transperitoneal approach. These advantages are weighed against the longer reported operative times and the possibility of bowel injury during mobilization. [3]
When considering hand-assisted surgery for radical nephrectomy, consider how the specimen is to be removed. If the kidney is to be morcellated and brought through a trocar site, perform one of the above approaches. If removing the specimen intact is desired, the hand-assisted approach allows use of the surgeon’s hand for retraction and dissection, although very large tumors cannot be removed intact through a small hand-port incision. The price paid for a hand-assisted approach is an 8-cm incision, possibly more pain, and a slower recovery than a strictly laparoscopic approach allows.
Currently, laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) is best indicated for T1 (< 7 cm) or T2 (>7 cm, limited to the kidney) cystic or solid renal masses. In the hands of an experienced surgeon, this can be broadened to include more extensive masses. [4] A review study by Ouellet et al reported that laparoscopic radical nephrectomy can be performed safely by experienced surgeons for very large renal masses (≥ 10 cm). [5] Approaching large renal masses laparoscopically is a growing trend in patients with advanced disease in whom adjuvant immunotherapy is to be administered. The benefit has been earlier institution of therapy due to the shortened recovery time with the laparoscopic approach. [6, 7, 8]
A laparoscopic approach can also be useful in patients who may have metastatic disease. This includes patients with renal masses or evidence of disease in the regional lymph nodes. Tissue is easily obtained from either site laparoscopically, sparing the patient a large incision.
Reviews of radical nephrectomy pathology reveal an overall adrenal metastatic rate of about 5%. With this low rate of metastatic disease, many surgeons have questioned the utility of performing an adrenalectomy in all patients undergoing radical nephrectomy. This is applicable to LRN because performing an adrenalectomy adds approximately 15-30 minutes to the procedure.
Throughout the literature, virtually all patients who had metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the ipsilateral adrenal gland had either large renal masses (≥ T2) or mid- to upper-pole masses. In the largest series, Sagalowsky et al noted a metastatic rate of 4.3% in 695 patients. [9] Of particular interest, metastases were more common on the left side, and only one of these occurred in a patient with a T1 lower-pole lesion (3.5 cm). Two reviews comment on the ability to predict the likelihood of adrenal metastasis based on preoperative imaging. In both reviews, no cases of adrenal metastasis were seen if the ipsilateral adrenal gland appeared normal on preoperative imaging (negative predictive value of 100%). Even if the adrenal gland appeared abnormal on staging workup, only 24-50% of patients actually had an adrenal metastasis.
Based on these data, the current practice is to perform an adrenalectomy in patients undergoing LRN for T2 or larger renal masses or upper-pole tumors of any size. The authors do not routinely perform adrenalectomy in patients with T1 lesions of the mid-to-lower kidney unless the staging workup reveals an abnormality or nonvisualization of the adrenal gland.
The kidneys are paired retroperitoneal structures that are normally located between the transverse processes of T12-L3 vertebrae, with the left kidney typically somewhat more superior in position than the right. The upper poles are normally oriented more medially and posteriorly than the lower poles.
The kidneys serve important functions, including filtration and excretion of metabolic waste products (urea and ammonium); regulation of necessary electrolytes, fluid, and acid-base balance; and stimulation of red blood cell production. They also serve to regulate blood pressure via the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, controlling reabsorption of water and maintaining intravascular volume. The kidneys also reabsorb glucose and amino acids and have hormonal functions via erythropoietin, calcitriol, and vitamin D activation.
One advantage of the transperitoneal approach to laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) is the familiarity of the anatomy to most urologists. An understanding of the ligaments at the upper and lateral borders of each kidney helps in colon mobilization and dissection of the upper renal poles. On the right, dividing the right triangular and part of the anterior coronary ligaments is usually necessary to fully visualize the upper pole. On the left, the upper pole is well visualized after division of the phrenicocolic, splenocolic, and the splenorenal ligaments at the splenic flexure. In addition, several ligaments that are attached to the anterior abdominal wall are often considered adhesions but actually represent very predictable ligaments.
Another useful anatomic detail to understand is the course of the ureter and gonadal vein and their relation to each other. Identification of these structures is vital because they can be followed superiorly to aid in hilar identification and dissection. At the level of the lower pole of the kidney and proximal ureter, the gonadal vessels are medial to the ureter. As they proceed inferiorly, they cross the ureter and become lateral as they exit the internal inguinal ring.
For more information about the relevant anatomy, see Kidney Anatomy and Ureter Anatomy.
Current laparoscopic vascular control limits application of LRN to patients without inferior vena cava tumor thrombus. Cautiously approach patients with tumors classified as either T3a (involving perinephric tissue inside the Gerota fascia) or T4 (beyond the Gerota fascia) because no large series report long-term safety and efficacy data for these. Renal vein invasion is no longer a contraindication as long as the margin of patent vein is adequate near the vena cava. [10, 11] Because renal cell carcinoma (RCC) tumor thrombus does not often involve the wall of the vein, the thrombus can often be milked back toward the kidney to attain enough margin to staple or clip the renal vein near its junction to the vena cava. Closely examine this margin, either grossly or by frozen section, before completing the case.
Consider a history of prior renal or abdominal surgery a relative contraindication and individualize each patient’s treatment based on surgical experience. Systemic conditions that must be considered include chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with hypercarbia, bleeding diatheses, ascites, and bowel obstruction.
Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR, Soper NJ, Dierks SM, Meretyk S, Darcy MD, et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy: initial case report. J Urol. 1991 Aug. 146(2):278-82. [Medline].
Nadu A, Ekstein P, Szold A, Friedman A, Nakache R, Cohen Y, et al. Ventilatory and hemodynamic changes during retroperitoneal and transperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy: a prospective real-time comparison. J Urol. 2005 Sep. 174(3):1013-7. [Medline].
Bishoff JT, Allaf ME, Kirkels W, Moore RG, Kavoussi LR, Schroder F. Laparoscopic bowel injury: incidence and clinical presentation. J Urol. 1999 Mar. 161(3):887-90. [Medline].
Berger AD, Kanofsky JA, O’Malley RL, Hyams ES, Chang C, Taneja SS, et al. Transperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for large (more than 7 cm) renal masses. Urology. 2008 Mar. 71(3):421-4. [Medline].
Ouellet S, Carmel M, Martel A, Sabbagh R. Perioperative outcomes for laparoscopic radical nephrectomies performed on ≥ 10 cm tumors. Can J Urol. 2014 Oct. 21 (5):7487-95. [Medline].
Nagele U, Walcher U, Herrmann TR. Initial experience with laparoscopic single-incision triangulated umbilical surgery (SITUS) in simple and radical nephrectomy. World J Urol. 2011 Apr 2. [Medline].
Mucksavage P, McDougall EM, Clayman RV. Laparoscopic transperitoneal nephrectomy for renal cancer: the University of California, Irvine, technique. J Endourol. 2011 Feb. 25(2):195-200. [Medline].
Ha US, Hwang TK, Kim YJ, Oh TH, Jeon YS, Lee W, et al. Comparison of oncological outcomes of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for the management of clear-cell renal cell carcinoma: a multi-institutional study. BJU Int. 2011 May. 107(9):1467-72. [Medline].
Sagalowsky AI, Kadesky KT, Ewalt DM, Kennedy TJ. Factors influencing adrenal metastasis in renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 1994 May. 151(5):1181-4. [Medline].
Hammond L, Powell TM, Schwartz BF. Pure laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for stage T(3b) renal-cell carcinoma: more than 2-year follow-up. J Endourol. 2007 Apr. 21(4):408-10. [Medline].
Steinnerd LE, Vardi IY, Bhayani SB. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal carcinoma with known level I renal vein tumor thrombus. Urology. 2007 Apr. 69(4):662-5. [Medline].
Leonardo C, Guaglianone S, De Carli P, Pompeo V, Forastiere E, Gallucci M. Laparoscopic nephrectomy using Ligasure system: preliminary experience. J Endourol. 2005 Oct. 19(8):976-8. [Medline].
Kouba E, Smith AM, Derksen JE, Gunn K, Wallen E, Pruthi RS. Efficacy and safety of en bloc ligation of renal hilum during laparoscopic nephrectomy. Urology. 2007 Feb. 69(2):226-9. [Medline].
Tisdale BE, Kapoor A, Hussain A, Piercey K, Whelan JP. Intact specimen extraction in laparoscopic nephrectomy procedures: Pfannenstiel versus expanded port site incisions. Urology. 2007 Feb. 69(2):241-4. [Medline].
Varkarakis I, Rha K, Hernandez F, Kavoussi LR, Jarrett TW. Laparoscopic specimen extraction: morcellation. BJU Int. 2005 Mar. 95 Suppl 2:27-31. [Medline].
Pareek G, Hedican SP, Gee JR, Bruskewitz RC, Nakada SY. Meta-analysis of the complications of laparoscopic renal surgery: comparison of procedures and techniques. J Urol. 2006 Apr. 175(4):1208-13. [Medline].
Biggs G, Hafron J, Feliciano J, Hoenig DM. Treatment of splenic injury during laparoscopic nephrectomy with BioGlue, a surgical adhesive. Urology. 2005 Oct. 66(4):882. [Medline].
Cadeddu JA, Ono Y, Clayman RV, Barrett PH, Janetschek G, Fentie DD, et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy for renal cell cancer: evaluation of efficacy and safety: a multicenter experience. Urology. 1998 Nov. 52(5):773-7. [Medline].
Dunn MD, Portis AJ, Shalhav AL, Elbahnasy AM, Heidorn C, McDougall EM, et al. Laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy: a 9-year experience. J Urol. 2000 Oct. 164(4):1153-9. [Medline].
Gill IS, Kavoussi LR, Clayman RV, Ehrlich R, Evans R, Fuchs G, et al. Complications of laparoscopic nephrectomy in 185 patients: a multi-institutional review. J Urol. 1995 Aug. 154(2 Pt 1):479-83. [Medline].
Ono Y, Kinukawa T, Hattori R, Yamada S, Nishiyama N, Mizutani K, et al. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: a five-year experience. Urology. 1999 Feb. 53(2):280-6. [Medline].
Barrett PH, Fentie DD, Taranger LA. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy with morcellation for renal cell carcinoma: the Saskatoon experience. Urology. 1998 Jul. 52(1):23-8. [Medline].
Portis AJ, Yan Y, Landman J, Chen C, Barrett PH, Fentie DD, et al. Long-term followup after laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. J Urol. 2002 Mar. 167(3):1257-62. [Medline].
Bouty A, Burnand K, Nightingale M, Roberts A, Campbell M, O’Brien M, et al. What is the risk of local recurrence after laparoscopic transperitoneal radical nephrectomy in children with Wilms tumours? Analysis of a local series and review of the literature. J Pediatr Urol. 2018 Aug. 14 (4):327.e1-327.e7. [Medline].
Mouraviev V, Nosnik I, Robertson C, Albala D, Walther P, Polascik TJ. Comparative financial analysis of minimally invasive surgery to open surgery for small renal tumours < or =3.5 cm: a single institutional experience. Eur Urol. 2007 Mar. 51(3):715-20; discussion 720-1. [Medline].
Guazzoni G, Cestari A, Naspro R, Riva M, Rigatti P. Cost containment in laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: feasibility and advantages over open radical nephrectomy. J Endourol. 2006 Jul. 20(7):509-13. [Medline].
Hollingsworth JM, Miller DC, Dunn RL, Montgomery JS, Wolf JS Jr. Cost trends for oncological renal surgery: support for a laparoscopic standard of care. J Urol. 2006 Sep. 176(3):1097-101; discussion 1101. [Medline].
Desai MM, Gill IS, Ramani AP, Matin SF, Kaouk JH, Campero JM. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for cancer with level I renal vein involvement. J Urol. 2003 Feb. 169(2):487-91. [Medline].
Gill IS, McClennan BL, Kerbl K, Carbone JM, Wick M, Clayman RV. Adrenal involvement from renal cell carcinoma: predictive value of computerized tomography. J Urol. 1994 Oct. 152(4):1082-5. [Medline].
Gill IS, Schweizer D, Hobart MG, Sung GT, Klein EA, Novick AC. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: the Cleveland clinic experience. J Urol. 2000 Jun. 163(6):1665-70. [Medline].
Kapoor A, Nguan C, Al-Shaiji TF, Hussain A, Fazio L, Al Omar M, et al. Laparoscopic management of advanced renal cell carcinoma with level I renal vein thrombus. Urology. 2006 Sep. 68(3):514-7. [Medline].
Kavoussi LR, Kerbl K, Capelouto CC, McDougall EM, Clayman RV. Laparoscopic nephrectomy for renal neoplasms. Urology. 1993 Nov. 42(5):603-9. [Medline].
Kletscher BA, Qian J, Bostwick DG, Blute ML, Zincke H. Prospective analysis of the incidence of ipsilateral adrenal metastasis in localized renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 1996 Jun. 155(6):1844-6. [Medline].
Leonardo C, Guaglianone S, De Carli P, Pompeo V, Forastiere E, Gallucci M. Laparoscopic nephrectomy using Ligasure system: preliminary experience. J Endourol. 2005 Oct. 19(8):976-8. [Medline].
O’Brien WM, Lynch JH. Adrenal metastases by renal cell carcinoma. Incidence at nephrectomy. Urology. 1987 Jun. 29(6):605-7. [Medline].
Rapp DE, Orvieto MA, Gerber GS, Johnston WK 3rd, Wolf JS Jr, Shalhav AL. En bloc stapling of renal hilum during laparoscopic nephrectomy and nephroureterectomy. Urology. 2004 Oct. 64(4):655-9. [Medline].
Schweizer DK, Gill IS, Vorce CL. Financial cost analysis of laparoscopic vs. open radical nephrectomy. J Urol. 2000. 161(4S):11.
Shekarriz B, Meng MV, Lu HF, Yamada H, Duh QY, Stoller ML. Laparoscopic nephrectomy for inflammatory renal conditions. J Urol. 2001 Dec. 166(6):2091-4. [Medline].
Shvarts O, Lam JS, Kim HL, Belldegrun AS. Staging of renal cell carcinoma: current concepts. BJU Int. 2005 Mar. 95 Suppl 2:8-13. [Medline].
Sokolov LK, Nikiforov PA, Bivol NK, Teremkov VK, Gur’ev PV. [Colonoscopy in the diagnosis and follow-up of colonic polyps]. Klin Med (Mosk). 1990 Jun. 68(6):106-10. [Medline].
Walther MM, Lyne JC, Libutti SK, Linehan WM. Laparoscopic cytoreductive nephrectomy as preparation for administration of systemic interleukin-2 in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a pilot study. Urology. 1999 Mar. 53(3):496-501. [Medline].
Winter P, Miersch WD, Vogel J, Jaeger N. On the necessity of adrenal extirpation combined with radical nephrectomy. J Urol. 1990 Oct. 144(4):842-3; discussion 844. [Medline].
William J Harmon, MD Medical Director, Urology San Antonio, PAAssociate Clinical Professor, Division of Urology, UTHSC, San Antonio, TX
William J Harmon, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Urological Association, Phi Beta Kappa
Disclosure: Received honoraria from Pacira Pharmacal for speaking and teaching.
Robert P Caruso, MD Director of Robotic and Laparoscopic Urologic Surgery, Essex-Hudson Urology PC, Bloomfield, NJ
Robert P Caruso, MD is a member of the following medical societies: Alpha Omega Alpha, American Urological Association, Phi Beta Kappa
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.
Jay T Bishoff, MD Chairman, Department of Urology, Intermountain Health Care; Director, Intermountain Urological Institute; Vice Chairman, Department of Surgery, Intermountain Medical Center; Associate Clinical Professor of Surgery, University of Utah College of Medicine
Jay T Bishoff, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Surgeons, American Urological Association, Endourological Society
Disclosure: Received honoraria from Pfizer for speaking and teaching; Received none from PerSys for consulting.
Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Pharmacy; Editor-in-Chief, Medscape Drug Reference
Disclosure: Received salary from Medscape for employment. for: Medscape.
Bradley Fields Schwartz, DO, FACS Professor of Urology, Director, Center for Laparoscopy and Endourology, Department of Surgery, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine
Bradley Fields Schwartz, DO, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Surgeons, American Urological Association, Association of Military Osteopathic Physicians and Surgeons, Endourological Society, Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons, Society of University Urologists
Disclosure: Serve(d) as a speaker or a member of a speakers bureau for: Cook Medical; Olympus.
Dan Theodorescu, MD, PhD Paul A Bunn Professor of Cancer Research, Professor of Surgery and Pharmacology, Director, University of Colorado Comprehensive Cancer Center
Dan Theodorescu, MD, PhD is a member of the following medical societies: American Cancer Society, American College of Surgeons, American Urological Association, Medical Society of Virginia, Society for Basic Urologic Research, and Society of Urologic Oncology
Disclosure: Key Genomics Ownership interest Co-Founder-50% Stock Ownership; KromaTiD, Inc Stock Options Board membership
Transperitoneal Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy
Research & References of Transperitoneal Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy|A&C Accounting And Tax Services
Source
0 Comments