Original Study| Volume 14, ISSUE 4, e335-e340, August 2016

Safety and Feasibility of Laparoscopic Nephrectomy for Big Tumors (≥ 10 cm): A Retrospective Multicentric Study

Published:January 27, 2016DOI:



      Evaluate the feasibility of laparoscopic nephrectomy for big tumors.

      Material and Methods

      Data from 116 patients were retrospectively collected from 16 tertiary centres. Clinical and operative parameters, tumor characteristics, pre- and postoperative parameters, and renal function before and after surgery were analyzed.


      Mean age and body mass index were 61 years and 27.8 kg/m2, respectively. Males represented 63.8% of patients, and 54.4% presented symptoms at diagnosis. Median tumor size was 11 cm, and 75% of the cases were performed by expert surgeons. Median operative time and blood loss were 180 minutes and 200 mL respectively. Conversion to open surgery was necessary in 20.7% of cases. Intraoperative complications related to massive hemorrhage occurred in 16.4% of patients, resulting in open conversion in 62.5%. Major postoperative complications occurred in only 10 patients (8.6%). In univariate analysis, intraoperative complications, age, and blood loss were predictive factors of conversion to open surgery. Positive surgical margins occurred in 6 patients (5.2%). None of them presented a local recurrence. Predictive factors of recurrence or progression were lymph node invasion, metastases, and Furhman grade.


      Laparoscopic nephrectomy for tumors > 10 cm can be performed safely. Complication rate and positive surgical margins are similar to open surgery. In experienced hands, the benefit of a mini invasive surgery remains evident.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Clinical Genitourinary Cancer
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Patard J.J.
        • Tazi H.
        • Bensalah K.
        • et al.
        The changing evolution of renal tumours: a single center experience over a two-decade period.
        Eur Urol. 2004; 45 (discussion: 493-4): 490-493
        • Ljungberg B.
        • Hanbury D.C.
        • Kuczyk M.A.
        • et al.
        Renal cell carcinoma guideline.
        Eur Urol. 2007; 51: 1502-1510
        • Verhoest G.
        • Delreux A.
        • Mathieu R.
        • et al.
        Transperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy for autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease.
        JSLS. 2012; 16: 437-442
        • Dillenburg W.
        • Poulakis V.
        • Skriapas K.
        • et al.
        Retroperitoneoscopic versus open surgical radical nephrectomy for large renal cell carcinoma in clinical stage cT2 or cT3a: quality of life, pain and reconvalescence.
        Eur Urol. 2006; 49 (discussion: 322-3): 314-322
        • Pierorazio P.M.
        • Hyams E.S.
        • Lin B.M.
        • Mullins J.K.
        • Allaf M.E.
        Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for large renal masses: critical assessment of perioperative and oncologic outcomes of stage T2a and T2b tumors.
        Urology. 2012; 79: 570-575
        • Berger A.D.
        • Kanofsky J.A.
        • O'Malley R.L.
        • et al.
        Transperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for large (more than 7 cm) renal masses.
        Urology. 2008; 71: 421-424
        • Luciani L.G.
        • Porpiglia F.
        • Cai T.
        • et al.
        Operative safety and oncologic outcome of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma >7 cm: a multicenter study of 222 patients.
        Urology. 2013; 81: 1239-1244
        • Levey A.S.
        • Bosch J.P.
        • Lewis J.B.
        • Greene T.
        • Rogers N.
        • Roth D.
        A more accurate method to estimate glomerular filtration rate from serum creatinine: a new prediction equation. Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study Group.
        Ann Intern Med. 1999; 130: 461-470
        • Sobin L.H.
        • Wittekind C.
        TNM Classification of malignant tumors. Sixth Edition.
        in: UICC International Union Against Cancer Ed Wiley. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken2003: 193-195
        • Lopez-Beltran A.
        • Scarpelli M.
        • Montironi R.
        • Kirkali Z.
        2004 WHO classification of the renal tumors of the adults.
        Eur Urol. 2006; 49: 798-805
        • Dave D.S.
        • Lam J.S.
        • Leppert J.T.
        • Belldegrun A.S.
        Open surgical management of renal cell carcinoma in the era of minimally invasive kidney surgery.
        BJU Int. 2005; 96: 1268-1274
        • Jeon S.H.
        • Kwon T.G.
        • Rha K.H.
        • et al.
        Comparison of laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy for large renal tumors: a retrospective analysis of multi-center results.
        BJU Int. 2011; 107: 817-821
        • Hemal A.K.
        • Kumar A.
        • Kumar R.
        • Wadhwa P.
        • Seth A.
        • Gupta N.P.
        Laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy for large renal tumors: a long-term prospective comparison.
        J Urol. 2007; 177: 862-866
        • Matin S.F.
        • Madsen L.T.
        • Wood C.G.
        Laparoscopic cytoreductive nephrectomy: the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center experience.
        Urology. 2006; 68: 528-532
        • Levy D.A.
        • Slaton J.W.
        • Swanson D.A.
        • Dinney C.P.
        Stage specific guidelines for surveillance after radical nephrectomy for local renal cell carcinoma.
        J Urol. 1998; 159: 1163-1167
        • Ljungberg B.
        • Alamdari F.I.
        • Rasmuson T.
        • Roos G.
        Follow-up guidelines for nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma based on the occurrence of metastases after radical nephrectomy.
        BJU Int. 1999; 84: 405-411