Search

Background and objective: Data regarding open conversion (OC) during minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for renal tumors are reported from big databases, without precise description of the reason and management of OC. The objective of this study was to describe the rate, reasons, and perioperative outcomes of OC in a cohort of patients who underwent MIS for renal tumor initially. The secondary objective was to find the factors associated with OC. Methods: Between 2008 and 2022, of the 8566 patients included in the UroCCR project prospective database (NCT03293563), who underwent laparoscopic or robot-assisted minimally invasive partial (MIPN) or radical (MIRN) nephrectomy, 163 experienced OC. Each center was contacted to enlighten the context of OC: “emergency OC” implied an immediate life-threatening situation not reasonably manageable with MIS, otherwise “elective OC”. To evaluate the predictive factors of OC, a 2:1 paired cohort on the UroCCR database was used. Key findings and limitations: The incidence rate of OC was 1.9% for all cases of MIS, 2.9% for MIRN, and 1.4% for MIPN. OC procedures were mostly elective (82.2%). The main reason for OC was a failure to progress due to anatomical difficulties (42.9%). Five patients (3.1%) died within 90 d after surgery. Increased body mass index (BMI; odds ratio [OR]: 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01–1.09, p = 0.009) and cT stage (OR: 2.22, 95% CI: 1.24–4.25, p = 0.008) were independent predictive factors of OC. Conclusions and clinical implications: In MIS for renal tumors, OC was a rare event (1.9%), caused by various situations, leading to impaired perioperative outcomes. Emergency OC occurred once every 300 procedures. Increased BMI and cT stage were independent predictive factors of OC. Patient summary: The incidence rate of open conversion (OC) in minimally invasive surgery for renal tumors is low. Only 20% of OC procedures occur in case of emergency, and others are caused by various situations. Increased body mass index and cT stage were independent predictive factors of OC.

Background: There is no definitive evidence of the prognosis impact of histological variants (HVs) in patients who undergo surgical resection of a nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma (nm-RCC) with venous tumor thrombus (TT). Objective: To investigate the impact of HVs on the prognosis of patients with nm-RCC with TT after radical surgery. Design, setting, and participants: Patients who underwent radical nephrectomy with the removal of the venous TT for an nm-RCC were included in a retrospective study. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Three groups were identified: clear cell (ccRCC), papillary (pRCC), and chromophobe (chRCC) RCC. The primary outcome measures (disease-free and overall survival [OS]) were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to study the impact of HVs on survival. Results and limitations: A total of 873 patients were included. The histological subtypes were distributed as follows: ccRCC in 780 cases, pRCC in 58 cases, and chRCC in 35 cases. At the time of data analysis, 612 patients were recurrence free and 228 had died. A survival analysis revealed significant differences in both OS and recurrence-free survival across histological subtypes, with the poorest outcomes observed in pRCC patients (p

A prognostic model based on the population of the ASSURE phase 3 trial has recently been described. The ASSURE model stratifies patients into risk groups to predict survival after surgical resection of intermediate- and high-risk localised kidney cancer. We evaluated this model in an independent cohort of 1372 patients using discrimination, calibration, and decision curve analysis. Regarding disease-free survival, the ASSURE model showed modest discrimination (65%), miscalibration, and poor net benefit compared with the UCLA Integrated Staging System (UISS) and Leibovich 2018 models. Similarly, the ability of the ASSURE model to predict overall survival was poor in terms of discrimination (63%), with overestimation on calibration plots and a modest net benefit for the probability threshold of between 10% and 40%. Overall, our results show that the performance of the ASSURE model was less optimistic than expected, and not associated with a clear improvement in patient selection and clinical usefulness in comparison to with available models. We propose an updated version using the recalibration method, which leads to a (slight) improvement in performance but should be validated in another external population. Patient summary: The recent ASSURE model evaluates survival after surgery for nonmetastatic kidney cancer. We found no clear improvement in patient classification when we compared ASSURE with older models, so use of this model for patients with nonmetastatic kidney cancer still needs to be clarified.