Laparoscopic versus open partial nephrectomy: prospective randomized study for assessment of surgical, functional, and oncological outcomes

Abstract

Abstract Background The purpose of this study was to compare the surgical, functional, and oncological outcomes between open partial nephrectomy (OPN) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN). Methods This prospective, randomized study was performed on patients who underwent partial nephrectomy under general anesthesia. Patients were randomized using the closed envelope method to either LPN or OPN. Baseline demographics and surgical, functional, and oncological outcomes were compared. A per-protocol analysis was used. Results Randomized study was conducted on 166 patients. The LPN, in comparison to the OPN group, was associated with significantly shorter hospital stay (3 vs. 4 days), less blood transfusion (10% vs. 12%), longer operative time (134 min vs. 124 min), lower visual analog pain score (7 vs. 8), and lower estimated GFR (70.7 ± 17.5 vs. 72.3 ± 14.7). Conclusions Oncological and functional results were comparable between LPN and OPN. However, LPN was superior to open surgery because of less hospital stay, visual analog pain score, and blood loss.

Keywords

• Renal mass
• RENAL score
• Nephron-sparing
• Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy