A Prospective, Randomized Trial Comparing the Outcomes of Open vs Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy

Abstract

PURPOSE: Partial nephrectomy is the standard treatment for renal tumors <7 cm, and the trend toward minimally invasive surgery has increased. However, data that could support its use and benefits are still lacking. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized controlled trial comparing surgical, functional and oncologic outcomes in patients undergoing open partial nephrectomy (OPN) or laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN). Randomization was 1:1 to OPN or LPN for the treatment of renal tumors <7 cm. The primary endpoint was surgical complications up to 90 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes were comparison of surgical, oncologic and functional results. RESULTS: We randomized 208 patients between 2012 and 2020 (110 with OPN vs 98 with LPN). Operative data showed no differences in operative time, warm ischemia time, estimated blood loss, transfusions or length of hospital stay. Zero ischemia was more frequent in the OPN (35.4% vs 15.5%, p=0.02). OPN was associated with more abdominal wall complications (31.2% vs 13.1%, p=0.004). Regarding oncologic outcomes, no differences were noted. The LPN group had less kidney function reduction at 3 (-5.2% vs -10%, p=0.04; CI 0.09 to 9.46) and 12 months after surgery (-0.8% vs -6.3%, p=0.02; CI 1.18 to 12.95), and a lower rate of downstaging on the chronic kidney disease classification at 12 months (14.1% vs 32.6%, p=0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical and oncologic outcomes of LPN were similar to OPN. Minimally invasive surgery may provide better preservation of kidney function. More studies, especially those involving robotic surgery, are necessary to confirm our findings.