ABSTRACT
<p><b>BACKGROUND</b>Most of the literatures on laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) versus open partial nephrectomy (OPN) focus on technical details and early or mid-term oncologic outcomes, reflecting that the approach is safe and provides midterm benefits compared with traditional open surgery. However, the difference of long-term oncologic outcome between LPN and OPN remains unclear. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the long-term oncologic outcome of LPN in the treatment of localized renal tumors compared with that of OPN.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>A systematic search of electronic databases including Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library was conducted. Comparative studies reporting on long-term oncologic outcome of LPN versus OPN were regarded eligible. The odds ratio (OR) and its corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for the oncologic outcomes. The methodologic quality of the included studies was evaluated using the strict criteria of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Six comparative studies (1495 participants including 555 LPN and 940 OPN) were included in the present study. There was no significant difference between LPN and OPN in 5-year overall survival (OS) rates (OR = 1.83, 95% CI (0.80, 4.19)), 5-year cancer specific survival (CSS) rates (OR = 1.09, 95% CI (0.62, 1.92)), and 5-year recurrence free survival (RFS) rates (OR = 0.68, 95% CI (0.37, 1.26)).</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>The results of this meta-analysis revealed that there was no significant difference in long-term oncologic outcome between LPN and OPN for treatment of localized renal tumors.</p>