Radical Nephrectomy: Too Radical For Small Renal Masses?

Main Category: Urology / Nephrology
Article Date: 13 Feb 2007 - 22:00 PDT

email icon email to a friend   printer icon printer friendly   write icon opinions  

Current Article Ratings:

Patient / Public:not yet rated

Healthcare Prof:5 stars

5 (1 votes)


UroToday.com- There remains several options for the management of an incidental mass in the setting of a normal contralateral kidney. These include radical nephrectomy (open/laparoscopic), partial nephrectomy (open/laparoscopic), as well as needle ablation (radiofrequency ablation/cryoablation). In 1969, open radical nephrectomy was established as the gold standard in the management of renal cell carcinoma. This paradigm was challenged in the 1980's, when several publications demonstrated the oncologic equipoise of partial nephrectomy with radical nephrectomy. In spite of this, currently only 20% of tumors 2-4 cm in the United States are treated with this approach, and only 4% of nephrectomies in the United Kingdom employ nephron sparing techniques.

A September 2006 Lancet Oncology publication by William C. Huang out of Memorial Sloan Kettering, "Chronic kidney disease after nephrectomy in patients with renal cortical tumors: a retrospective cohort study," demonstrated that 26% of patients with renal cell carcinoma with a normal serum creatinine and a normal appearing contralateral kidney actually had a glomerular filtration rate < 60 ml/min/1.73m2 and that performing radical nephrectomy was a significant independent risk factor for the development of renal insufficiency after treatment for renal cell carcinoma.

Why is nephron sparing underutilized? First and foremost, it is a technically challenging operation that may be beyond the skill set of the practicing community urologist. Second, is the common misconception that renal insufficiency is of little concern following radical nephrectomy. Finally, laparoscopic radical nephrectomy may be technically easier to perform, associated with a decrease recovery period for the patient, and more "21st Century" when compared with traditional open surgical approaches. Whatever the reason, it remains clear that nephron sparing approaches remain underutilized on a global scale, and unnecessary loss of renal mass, with its associated morbidity, is far more prevalent than it needs to be.

Thompson RH
The Lancet, 368 (9538), Pages 823-824, 02 September 2006

Reviewed by UroToday.com Medical Editor Christopher G. Wood, MD, FACS

UroToday - the only urology website with original content written by global urology key opinion leaders actively engaged in clinical practice.

To access the latest urology news releases from UroToday, go to: www.urotoday.com

Copyright © 2006 - UroToday

Article adapted by Medical News Today from original press release.
Visit our urology / nephrology section for the latest news on this subject.
There are no references listed for this article.
Please use one of the following formats to cite this article in your essay, paper or report:

MLA
Christian Nordqvist. "Radical Nephrectomy: Too Radical For Small Renal Masses?." Medical News Today. MediLexicon, Intl., 13 Feb. 2007. Web.
14 Feb. 2012. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/63012.php>

APA
Christian Nordqvist. (2007, February 13). "Radical Nephrectomy: Too Radical For Small Renal Masses?." Medical News Today. Retrieved from
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/63012.php.

Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.


Urology / Nephrology

Most Popular Articles



Follow Our Urology News On Twitter

Follow Us On Twitter
Get the latest news for this category delivered straight to your Twitter account. Simply visit our Urology / Nephrology Twitter account and select the 'follow' option.



View list of all 'What Is...' articles »