Search

Background: Laparoscopy is currently challenging the role of the open approach for nephron-sparing surgery (NSS), yet comparative studies on this issue are scant., Objective: To compare surgical, oncologic, and functional outcomes after laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) and open partial nephrectomy (OPN)., Design, Setting, and Participants: We undertook matched-pair (age, sex, tumour size) analysis of patients who underwent elective NSS for renal masses either by laparoscopic (Klagenfurt) or open (Vienna) access., Measurements: Surgical data, complications, histologic and oncologic data, and short- and long-term renal function of the open and laparoscopic groups were compared., Results and Limitations: In total, 200 patients matched for age, sex, and tumour size entered the study after either LPN or OPN and were followed for a mean of 3.6 yr. Surgical, ischemia, and hospitalisation times were shorter in the LPN group (p<0.001). Blood loss and complication rates were comparable in both groups. Malignant tumours were pT1 stage renal-cell cancer only in both groups. The positive surgical margin (PSM) rate was 4% after LPN and 2% after OPN (p=0.5); positive margins were not a risk factor for disease recurrence. Kaplan-Meier estimates of 5-yr local recurrence-free survival (RFS) were 97% after LPN and 98% after OPN (p=0.8); the respective numbers for distant free survival were 99% and 96% (p=0.2). Five-year overall survival (OS) for patients with pT1 stage renal cell carcinoma (RCC) was 96% after LPN and 85% after OPN. The decline in glomerular filtration rate at the last available follow-up (LPN: 10.9%; OPN: 10.6%) was similar in both groups (p=0.8). We recognise the retrospective nature, limited follow-up, and sample size as shortcomings of this study., Conclusions: In experienced hands, LPN provides similar results compared to open surgery. PSM rates were comparable after LPN and OPN. Current experience questions the indication of secondary nephrectomy in these patients.