Systematic Review of Surgical Management of Nonmetastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma with Vena Caval Thrombus
Jazyk angličtina Země Švýcarsko Médium print-electronic
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, systematický přehled
PubMed
26707869
DOI
10.1016/j.eururo.2015.11.034
PII: S0302-2838(15)01205-1
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Klíčová slova
- Circulatory bypass and preoperative embolisation, Nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma, Surgical management of tumour thrombus, Systematic review, Thrombectomy, Vena caval thrombus,
- MeSH
- chirurgie operační * škodlivé účinky metody MeSH
- karcinom z renálních buněk komplikace patologie MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- nádory ledvin komplikace patologie MeSH
- staging nádorů MeSH
- vaskulární nádory * etiologie patologie chirurgie MeSH
- venae cavae * patologie chirurgie MeSH
- zohlednění rizika MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- systematický přehled MeSH
CONTEXT: Overall, 4-10% of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) present with venous tumour thrombus. It is uncertain which surgical technique is best for these patients. Appraisal of outcomes with differing techniques would guide practice. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review relevant literature comparing the outcomes of different surgical therapies and approaches in treating vena caval thrombus (VCT) from nonmetastatic RCC. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Relevant databases (Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library) were searched to identify relevant comparative studies. Risk of bias and confounding assessments were performed. A narrative synthesis of the evidence was presented. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The literature search identified 824 articles. Fourteen studies reporting on 2262 patients were included. No distinct surgical method was superior for the excision of VCT, although the method appeared to be dependent on tumour thrombus level. Minimal access techniques appeared to have better perioperative and recovery outcomes than traditional median sternotomy, but the impact on oncologic outcomes is unknown. Preoperative renal artery embolisation did not offer any oncologic benefits and instead resulted in significantly worse perioperative and recovery outcomes, including possibly higher perioperative mortality. The comparison of cardiopulmonary bypass versus no cardiopulmonary bypass showed no differences in oncologic outcomes. Overall, there were high risks of bias and confounding. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence base, although derived from retrospective case series and complemented by expert opinion, suggests that patients with nonmetastatic RCC and VCT and acceptable performance status should be considered for surgical intervention. Despite a robust review, the findings were associated with uncertainty due to the poor quality of primary studies available. The most efficacious surgical technique remains unclear. PATIENT SUMMARY: We examined the literature on the benefits of surgery to remove kidney cancers that have spread to neighbouring veins. The results suggest such surgery, although challenging and associated with high risk of complications, appears to be feasible and effective and should be contemplated for suitable patients if possible; however, many uncertainties remain due to the poor quality of the data.
Academic Urology Unit University of Aberdeen Aberdeen UK
Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences Urology and Andrology Umeå University Umeå Sweden
Department of Urology Aberdeen Royal Infirmary Aberdeen UK
Department of Urology and Urologic Oncology Hannover Medical School Hannover Germany
Department of Urology Coimbra University Hospital Coimbra Portugal
Department of Urology Ludwig Maximilians University Munich Germany
Department of Urology Radboud University Medical Centre Nijmegen The Netherlands
Department of Urology Skåne University Hospital Malmö Sweden
Department of Urology Sunderby Hospital Sunderby Sweden
Department of Urology University Hospital Schleswig Holstein Lübeck Germany
Department of Urology University of Rennes Rennes France
Division of Urology Maggiore della Carita' Hospital University of Eastern Piedmont Novara Italy
Division of Urology University of Texas Medical School at Houston Houston TX USA
The Royal Free NHS Trust and Barts Cancer Institute Queen Mary University of London London UK
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org