Xu Congcong, Lin Caixiu, Xu Zhen, Feng Sheng, Zheng Yichun
Department of Urology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Department of Neurology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Front Oncol. 2019 Jun 4;9:473. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2019.00473. eCollection 2019.
Tumor enucleation (TE) and partial nephrectomy (PN) have both become main treatment strategies for T1 renal cell carcinoma (RCC), despite the discrepancy between their safety margin. We performed a meta-analysis on all the relevant trials in order to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of TE with those of PN for RCC treatment. In this meta-analysis, randomized controlled trials or retrospective studies were included if they compared TE and PN therapy in patients with localized renal cancer. The main outcomes extracted were perioperative data and post-operative outcomes. Subgroups for analyses were undertaken according to tumor size and duration of follow up. Data were pooled using the generic variance method with a fixed or random effects model and expressed as mean differences or odds ratios with 95% CI. A total of 13 studies containing 1,792 patients undergoing TE and 3,068 undergoing PN were identified. Our study showed that the patients received TE had significantly shorter operative time (MD = -28.46, 95% CI = -42.09, -14.83, < 0.0001), less hospital day (MD = -0.68, 95% CI = -1.04, -0.31, = 0.0003), less estimate blood loss (MD = -59.90, 95% CI = -93.23, -26.58, = 0.0004) and smaller change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (fixed effect: MD = 4.66, 95% CI = 1.67, 7.66, = 0.002), fewer complications (fixed effect: OR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.50, 0.85, = 0.001) compared with those received PN. However, there were no significant differences in terms of warm ischemic time, positive margin rates, recurrence rates and survival rates between the two groups. All the subgroup analyses presented consistent results with the overall analyses. Our findings suggested that TE is not only less-traumatizing and beneficial for recovery, but also better for renal function protection. Moreover, it did not show the evidence of an increase relapse rate or mortality rate when compared with PN.
肿瘤剜除术(TE)和部分肾切除术(PN)均已成为T1期肾细胞癌(RCC)的主要治疗策略,尽管它们的安全切缘存在差异。我们对所有相关试验进行了荟萃分析,以比较TE与PN治疗RCC的临床疗效和安全性。在这项荟萃分析中,如果随机对照试验或回顾性研究比较了局限性肾癌患者的TE和PN治疗,则将其纳入。提取的主要结局是围手术期数据和术后结局。根据肿瘤大小和随访时间进行亚组分析。使用通用方差法和固定或随机效应模型汇总数据,并表示为平均差或比值比及95%置信区间。共确定了13项研究,其中1792例患者接受了TE,3068例患者接受了PN。我们的研究表明,与接受PN的患者相比,接受TE的患者手术时间明显更短(平均差=-28.46,95%置信区间=-42.09,-14.83,P<0.0001)、住院天数更少(平均差=-0.68,95%置信区间=-1.04,-0.31,P=0.0003)、估计失血量更少(平均差=-59.90,95%置信区间=-9