Increased risk of overall and cardiovascular mortality after radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma 2 cm or less.

PURPOSE

We used a large, population based registry to assess whether a difference in overall and cardiovascular survival may exist between radical nephrectomy and partial nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma 2 cm or less.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From the SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results) registry we identified 4,216 patients with histologically confirmed renal cell carcinoma 2 cm or less who were treated with partial or radical nephrectomy. Patient and tumor characteristics were compared between the 2 patient groups. Multivariate logistic regression was done to predict the odds of undergoing radical nephrectomy. Cardiovascular survival and overall survival were compared between the 2 cohorts, adjusting for patient and tumor characteristics.

RESULTS

Overall 2,301 patients (55%) underwent partial nephrectomy. Partial nephrectomy use steadily increased during the study period from 27% of all cases in 1998 to 66% in 2007. Patients who underwent partial nephrectomy were an average of 2.5 years younger than those treated with radical nephrectomy (56.4 vs 58.9 years, p <0.001). They were more likely to be white and from the western or northeastern United States. Older age was the only independent predictor of radical nephrectomy (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01-1.03). When controlling for patient characteristics and surgery year, radical nephrectomy was associated with worse overall mortality (HR 2.24, 95% CI 1.75-2.84) and cardiovascular mortality (HR 2.53, 95% CI 1.51-4.23).

CONCLUSIONS

Radical nephrectomy is associated with worse overall and cardiovascular survival compared to partial nephrectomy in patients with localized renal cell carcinoma 2 cm or less. These findings justify the widespread application of nephron sparing techniques to treat localized kidney cancer.