scholarly journals Open Nephroureterectomy Compared to Laparoscopic in Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guihong Liu ◽  
Zeqin Yao ◽  
Guoqiang Chen ◽  
Yalang Li ◽  
Bing Liang

Background: In this meta-analysis, we will focus on evaluating the effects of open nephroureterectomy compared with laparoscopic nephroureterectomy on postoperative results in upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma subjects.Methods: A systematic literature search up to January 2021 was performed, and 36 studies included 23,013 subjects with upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma at the start of the study; of them, 8,178 were laparoscopic nephroureterectomy, and 14,835 of them were open nephroureterectomy. They were reporting relationships between the efficacy and safety of open nephroureterectomy compared with laparoscopic nephroureterectomy in the treatment of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) or the mean difference (MD) with 95% CIs to evaluate the efficacy and safety of open nephroureterectomy compared with laparoscopic nephroureterectomy in the treatment of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma using the dichotomous or continuous method with a random or fixed-effect model.Results: Laparoscopic nephroureterectomy in subjects with upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma was significantly related to longer operation time (MD, 43.90; 95% CI, 20.91–66.90, p < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (MD, −1.71; 95% CI, −2.42 to −1.00, p < 0.001), lower blood loss (MD, −133.82; 95% CI, −220.92 to −46.73, p = 0.003), lower transfusion need (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.47–0.67, p < 0.001), and lower overall complication (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70–0.90, p < 0.001) compared with open nephroureterectomy.However, no significant difference was found between laparoscopic nephroureterectomy and open nephroureterectomy in subjects with upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma in 2–5 years recurrence-free survival (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.69–1.18, p = 0.46), 2–5 years cancer-specific survival (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.69–1.28, p = 0.68), and 2–5 years overall survival (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.91–1.87, p = 0.15).Conclusion: Laparoscopic nephroureterectomy in subjects with upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma may have a longer operation time, shorter hospital stay, and lower blood loss, transfusion need, and overall complication compared to open nephroureterectomy. Further studies are required to validate these findings.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
chengwu xiao ◽  
Yang Wang ◽  
Meimian Hua ◽  
Wei Zhang ◽  
Guanyu Ren ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: To describe techniques for complete transperitoneal laparoscopic nephroureterectomy for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) with a single position and here to report our outcomes. Materials and methods: Between January 2016 and June 2019, our group performed 50 complete transperitoneal laparoscopic nephroureterectomy (CTLNU) and 48 laparoscopic nephroureterectomy with open bladder cuff excision (LNOBE) for UTUC without metastases in our group. The clinical data were collected and analyzed retrospectively. Results: All 98 patients of radical nephroureterectomy performance were successfully without transferred into open surgery. No significant difference was found in patient’s clinical characteristics. Compare with LNOBE group, the CTLNU group had shorter operative time(98.5±40.3min vs 132.4±60.2min), less blood loss(60.4±20.3ml vs 150.6±50.2ml), shorter length of hospital stay(5.3±2.2d vs 8.1±2.3d), and shorter length of incision(6.3±1.2cm vs 11.5±3.2cm). Pathological stage, tumor grade, recurrence rate was similar between these two groups. Conclusions: Complete transperitoneal laparoscopic nephroureterectomy(CTLNU) in a single position had advantages of shorter operation time, less blood loss, and shorter incision length. This operative method could minimize invasive and accelerate recovery of patients which deserved clinical application and promotion.


2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shiu-Dong Chung ◽  
Shyh-Chyan Chen ◽  
Shuo-Meng Wang ◽  
Shih-Chieh Chueh ◽  
Ming-Kuen Lai ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. e831-e841 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chihyun Ahn ◽  
Chang Wook Jeong ◽  
Cheol Kwak ◽  
Hyeon Hoe Kim ◽  
Hyung Suk Kim ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document