Laparoscopic renal cryoablation.

In light of evidence linking radical nephrectomy and consequent suboptimal renal function to adverse cardiovascular events and increased mortality, research into nephron-sparing techniques for renal masses widely expanded in the past two decades. The American Urological Association (AUA) guidelines now explicitly list partial nephrectomy as the standard of care for the management of T1a renal tumors. Because of the increasing utilization of cross-sectional imaging, up to 70% of newly detected renal masses are stage T1a, making them more amenable to minimally invasive nephron-sparing therapies including laparoscopic and robotic partial nephrectomy and ablative therapies. Cryosurgery has emerged as a leading option for renal ablation, and compared with surgical techniques it offers benefits in preserving renal function with fewer complications, shorter hospitalization times, and allows for quicker convalescence. A mature dataset exists at this time, with intermediate and long-term follow-up data available. Cryosurgical recommendations as a first-line therapy are made at this time in limited populations, including elderly patients, patients with multiple comorbidities, and those with a solitary kidney. As more data emerge on oncologic efficacy, and technical experience and the technology continue to improve, the application of this modality will likely be extended in future treatment guidelines.

Trends and inequalities in the surgical management of ureteric calculi in the USA.

OBJECTIVE: To assess trends in the surgical management of ureteric calculi over a 10-year period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An analysis of the 5% Medicare Public Use Files, from 2001, 2004, 2007 and 2010, was performed to assess the use of ureteroscopy (URS), extracorporal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) and ureterolithotomy (UL) in treating ureteric calculi. Patients were identified using International Classification of Diseases 9th edition (Clinical Modification) and Current Procedure Terminology codes. Statistical analyses using the Fisher and chi-squared tests, and multivariate logistic regression analysis (dependent variables: URS, ESWL, UL, treatment, no treatment; independent variables: age, gender, ethnicity, geography and year of treatment) were performed. RESULTS: A total of 299 920 patients with ureteric calculi were identified. Of these, 115 200 underwent surgery. Men (odds ratio [OR] = 1.15, P < 0.001) were more likely, while patients from ethnic minorities (OR = 0.84, P = 0.004) were less likely to be treated. Patients in the West of the USA were also less likely to be treated (OR = 0.76, P < 0.001) as were patients aged <65 or >84 years old (P = 0.29). The predominant surgical approach was URS (65.2%), followed by ESWL (33.6%) and UL (1.2%). The use of URS increased over time, while the use of ESWL and UL declined. Women (OR = 1.25, P < 0.001) were more likely to undergo URS. Patients in the South of the USA (OR = 1.51, P < 0.001) and patients from ethnic minorities were more likely to undergo ESWL (OR = 1.23, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The surgical treatment of ureteric calculi changed significantly between 2001 and 2010. The use of URS expanded at the expense of ESWL and UL. Multiple inequalities existed in overall surgical treatment rates and in the choice of treatment; age, gender, ethnicity and geography influenced both whether patients underwent surgical intervention and the type of surgical approach used.

Trends in the utilization of percutaneous and open nephrolithotomy in the treatment of renal calculi.

PURPOSE: To evaluate trends in the use of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and nephrolithotomy (NL) in patients with renal pelvis calculi. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An analysis of the 5% Medicare Public Use Files (years 2001, 2004, 2007, and 2010) was performed to assess changes in the use of PCNL and NL over a 10-year period. Patients were identified using the International Classification of Diseases-9 (cm) and Current Procedure Terminology codes. Statistical analyses, including the Fisher and chi-square tests and multivariate regression analyses, were performed using SAS 9.3 (SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC) and SPSS v20 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). RESULTS: A total of 26,100 patients underwent either PCNL or NL. Use of PCNL and NL decreased from 3.1% to 2.5% in patients with a diagnosis of stones (P<0.0001). Women (odds ration [OR]=1.19, P=0.003) were more likely to undergo surgery. Patients aged ≥65 years were less likely to be treated (OR=0.65-0.71, P<0.05). Patients treated after 2004 were less likely to undergo surgery (OR=0.77-0.84, P<0.05). The use of PCNL exceeded NL at a stable 10:1 ratio. CONCLUSIONS: The use of PCNL and NL for treatment of patients with stone disease slightly decreased from 2001 to 2010, although the number of patients with renal calculi increased. The use of PCNL vs NL was unchanged during this period. Multiple inequalities existed in overall surgical treatment rates and were influenced by sociodemographic factors such as age and sex.

Laparoendoscopic single-site radical nephrectomy for large renal masses.

PURPOSE: To report our operative experience and short-term outcomes for the laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) management of large renal tumors and tumors of advanced stage. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ten consecutive patients underwent LESS-radical nephrectomy (RN) for large (≥ 7 cm) and/or locally advanced tumors (>T(2)). Intraoperative, postoperative, and short-term follow-up data were analyzed. RESULTS: Median surgical time was 146 minutes (range 73-164 min), and median estimated blood loss was 100 mL (range 25-400 mL). No procedure needed conversion to open RN or hand-assisted laparoscopic RN. The median hospital stay was 47 hours (range 42 hours-12 days). One (10%) patient had a minor complication (postoperative fever treated with antibiotics) and one (10%) patient had a major complication (small bowel obstruction necessitating reoperation). Of the 10 tumors, 2 were pathologic stage T(1b), 4 were pathologic stage T(2), and 4 were stage T(3a). At a median follow-up of 12.3 months (range 1-16 mos), six (60%) patients were alive without evidence of recurrence, and 4 (40%) patients were alive with disease. Of those four patients, all four had known metastatic disease before surgery. CONCLUSION: LESS-RN for large or advanced stage renal masses is a technically challenging operation. In experienced hands, however, it is a safe and feasible therapeutic option for the management of these tumors.

Preoperative radiographic parameters predict long-term renal impairment following partial nephrectomy.

PURPOSE: We analyzed radiographic parameters describing anatomic features of renal tumors to identify preoperative characteristics that could help predict long-term decline in renal function following partial nephrectomy. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 194 consecutive patients who underwent partial nephrectomy from January 2006 to March 2009 and analyzed a cohort of 53 patients for whom complete clinical, radiographic, and operative information was available. Computed tomography images were reviewed by a single radiologist. Radiographic criteria for describing renal tumor size and location included diameter, volume, endophytic properties, proximity to collecting system, anterior/posterior location, location relative to polar lines, and R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score. Postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate was calculated using the MDRD study group equation with serum creatinine at last follow-up. RESULTS: The median preoperative and postoperative GFR values were 75 (IQR 65-97) and 66 (IQR 55-84) mL/min/1.73 m(2), respectively. At a median follow-up of 38 months, the median percentage decrease in GFR was 12%. On univariate analyses, tumor diameter (P = 0.002), tumor volume (P < 0.0001), nearness of tumor to collecting system (P = 0.017), and location relative to polar lines (P = 0.017) were associated with percentage decrease in GFR. Furthermore, higher R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score was also associated with poorer renal functional outcomes following partial nephrectomy (P = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Anatomic features of renal tumors defined by preoperative radiographic characteristics correlate with the degree of renal functional decline after partial nephrectomy. Identification of these parameters may assist in patient counseling and clinical decision making following partial nephrectomy. Validation in larger prospective studies is necessary.

Early corticosteroid withdrawal in recipients of renal allografts: a single-center report of ethnically diverse recipients and recipients of marginal deceased-donor kidneys.

BACKGROUND: Candidacy for kidney transplantation is being progressively liberalized, and the safety and efficacy of early withdrawal of corticosteroids in high-risk patients have not been fully characterized. METHODS: We analyzed the safety and efficacy of an early corticosteroid withdrawal regimen of rabbit antithymocyte globulin induction, tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and steroid withdrawal by day 5 after transplantation in our study cohort of 634 kidney transplant recipients that included 27% African American and 18% Hispanic recipients. Fifty-five percent of the recipients were recipients of deceased-donor kidneys, and 46% of deceased-donor kidneys were kidneys from expanded criteria donors. RESULTS: Kaplan-Meier patient survival at 1, 3, and 5 years after transplantation was 98.6%, 94.6%, and 90.2%, and death-censored graft survival was 96.2%, 91.9%, and 87.6%, respectively. During a mean follow-up of 57 months, 89.3% of patients remained off of corticosteroids, and the incidence of acute rejection including subclinical rejection identified by protocol biopsy was 12.0%. Multivariable analysis identified age older than 60 years as protective against (P=0.01) and the African American ethnicity as a risk factor for (P=0.03) rejection. Delayed graft function (P<0.0001), rejection (P<0.0001), and transplant panel reactive antibody 20% or more (P=0.03) were risk factors for graft loss. Opportunistic infections included viral in 15.3%, fungal in 1.6%, and parasitic in 0.6% of the patients. Posttransplantation malignancy occurred in 9.1% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: An early corticosteroid withdrawal regimen of rabbit antithymocyte globulin induction, tacrolimus, and mycophenolate mofetil is associated with excellent patient and kidney graft survival in an ethnically diverse population with risk factors for poor outcomes.

Living donor kidney paired donation transplantation: experience as a founding member center of the National Kidney Registry.

Kidney paired donation (KPD) is a safe and effective means of transplantation for transplant candidates with willing but incompatible donors. We report our single-center experience with KPD through participation in the National Kidney Registry. Patient demographics, transplant rates, and clinical outcomes including delayed graft function (DGF), rejection, and survival were analyzed. We also review strategies employed by our center to maximize living donor transplantation through KPD. We entered 44 incompatible donor/recipient pairs into KPD from 9/2007 to 1/2011, enabling 50 transplants. Incompatibility was attributable to blood type (54.4%) and donor-specific sensitization (43.2%). Thirty-six candidates (81.8%) were transplanted after 157 d (median), enabling pre-emptive transplantation in eight patients. Fourteen candidates on the deceased donor waiting list also received transplants. More than 50% of kidneys were received from other transplant centers. DGF occurred in 6%; one-yr rejection rate was 9.1%. One-yr patient and graft survival was 98.0% and 94.8%. KPD involving participation of multiple transplant centers can provide opportunities for transplantation, with potential to expand the donor pool, minimize waiting times, and enable pre-emptive transplantation. Our experience demonstrates promising short-term outcomes; however, longer follow-up is needed to assess the impact of KPD on the shortage of organs available for transplantation.

Laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy: complication comparison using the Clavien system.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To compare postoperative complications in patients undergoing laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy using a standardized complication-reporting system and a standardized tumor-scoring system. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 189 consecutive patients with nephrometry scores available who underwent elective partial nephrectomy for renal masses. Demographic, perioperative, and complication data were recorded. By using the modified Clavien scale, we graded 30- and 90-day complication rates. RESULTS: 107 patients underwent laparoscopic partial nephrectomy and 82 underwent open partial nephrectomy (N=189). Open partial nephrectomy patients had higher nephrometry scores than laparoscopic patients had (7.1±2.4 vs. 5.6±1.8, P<.001). Surgical and hospitalization times were shorter, and estimated blood loss was lower in the laparoscopic group (P<.001). At 30 days, there were more overall complications in the open group, but more major complications in the laparoscopic group (P>.05). After multivariable logistic regression analysis, only higher body mass index and higher estimated blood loss were predictors of more overall complications. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy has the advantages of decreased operative time, lower blood loss, and shorter hospital stay. The complication rate in the laparoscopic group is similar to that in the open group, despite favorable tumor characteristics in the laparoscopic group.

Laparoendoscopic single-site nephrectomy in obese living renal donors.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery has been shown to be feasible in living donor nephrectomies (DNs). Obesity is an established risk factor for perioperative morbidity. We sought to determine whether LESS-DN is safe and effective in the obese (body mass index [BMI] ≥30 kg/m(2)) population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between August 2009 and September 2010, 125 consecutive LESS-DN were performed; 32 patients were obese. This group was matched to 32 nonobese LESS-DN (BMI <30 kg/m(2)) patients, 32 obese conventional laparoscopic DN (obese LAP-DN) patients, and 32 nonobese LAP-DN patients. Comparison parameters included organ recovery time, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), warm ischemia time (WIT), incision length, complications, and recipient allograft function. RESULTS: Demographic data were similar between the groups, except BMI (P>0.0001). Organ recovery time, EBL, WIT, complications, and recipient allograft function were similar between the obese LESS-DN group and the other three groups (P>0.05). Total operative time was longer in the obese LESS-DN compared with the nonobese LAP-DN (P<0.0001); however, incision length was shorter in the obese LESS-DN group compared with either LAP group (P<0.0001). Complete LESS-DN was successful in 62 (97%) cases (two obese donor cases were converted to hand-assisted laparoscopy). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that LESS-DN can be performed safely in obese donors without increased donor morbidity and similar recipient allograft outcomes compared with ideal-sized donors as well as with conventional LAP-DN patients.

Comparison of laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy and conventional laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: donor and recipient outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To present a comparison of perioperative donor outcomes and recipient graft function in a series of patients undergoing laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy (LESS-DN) versus conventional laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN). METHODS: Data were collected for 50 consecutive LESS-DN patients and a matched cohort of 50 LDN patients. The donor outcomes analyzed included operative time, estimated blood loss, complications, visual analog pain scores, and recovery time. The recipient outcomes analyzed included serum creatinine at discharge and follow-up and the incidence of delayed graft function. RESULTS: The mean total operative time was shorter in the LDN group than in the LESS-DN group (P < .0001). Linear regression analysis of the LESS-DN operative times relative to case number showed a significant decrease in the operative time with increasing case number (r(2) = 0.19, P = .002). No statistically significant differences were found in estimated blood loss, warm ischemia time, length of stay, or visual analog pain scores between the 2 groups. However, the surgical incision was significantly smaller in the LESS-DN group (P < .0001). After discharge, the patient-reported time to complete recovery was faster in the LESS-DN group (P = .01). The incidence of complications was similar in both groups; however, major complications only occurred in the LDN group. No differences were found in the recipient serum creatinine values or the incidence of delayed graft function. CONCLUSION: Our initial experience with LESS-DN is encouraging. This retrospective matched-pair comparison between LESS-DN and LDN suggests that the single-port approach might be associated with quicker convalescence. Longer operative times in the LESS-DN group could simply represent the learning curve of a novel procedure.

Laparoendoscopic single site live donor nephrectomy: single institution report of initial 100 cases.

PURPOSE: Laparoendoscopic single site surgery is a recent advance in minimally invasive urology. We report outcomes from our initial 100 consecutive laparoendoscopic single site live donor nephrectomies done by a single surgeon and provide a matched comparison of conventional laparoscopic live donor nephrectomies done by the same surgeon. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2009 to 2010 at a tertiary referral center 100 consecutive laparoendoscopic single site live donor nephrectomies were performed by a single surgeon through a periumbilical incision using the GelPoint® system. No extraumbilical incisions or punctures were made. A retrospective review was performed using a prospectively managed database of standard perioperative and convalescent parameters. Comparison was made using a matched cohort of conventional live donor nephrectomies done by the same surgeon. RESULTS: Mean operative time was longer in the laparoendoscopic single site group (156 vs 130 minutes) but there was no difference in estimated blood loss or warm ischemia time. There was no difference in the complication rate between the 2 groups. Mean hospital stay and visual analog pain scores were similar in the groups but the laparoendoscopic group showed improved convalescence with faster return to work, normal activity and 100% recovery. Recipient graft function was equivalent in the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective, matched comparison laparoendoscopic single site live donor nephrectomy was associated with longer operative time but equivalent recipient graft function and improved convalescence. The benefits of laparoendoscopic single site surgery over conventional laparoscopy may be limited. However, with respect to live donor nephrectomy the benefits of laparoendoscopic single site surgery may nevertheless prove beneficial to decrease barriers to live organ donation.

Current status of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN).

OBJECTIVE: • Robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) is a minimally invasive option for patients undergoing nephron-sparing surgery (NSS). As the technique of RPN develops and matures, intraoperative and perioperative outcomes continue to be reported. In the current review, we discuss safety, efficacy, and recent technical advances in RPN. METHODS: • A Medline search using the keywords 'partial nephrectomy', 'robotic partial nephrectomy', 'robot partial nephrectomy', 'robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy', and 'laparoscopic partial nephrectomy' was conducted to identify original articles, review articles, and editorials on RPN. RESULTS: • There have been multiple recent retrospective studies comparing RPN with laparoscopic PN (LPN). These comparisons suggest a shorter learning curve for RPN and confirm the safety and feasibility of RPN, even for select complex renal masses. • Novel techniques have been developed in efforts to decrease warm ischaemia time. These include use of sliding-clip renorrhaphy, selective renal parenchymal clamping, and 'early unclamping' or 'no-clamp' techniques. CONCLUSIONS: • RPN appears to be a viable minimally invasive option for NSS. RPN may reduce some of the technical challenges associated with LPN, and thus, extend the potential benefits of minimally invasive NSS to a larger population. • Further studies of the long-term renal functional outcomes and oncological efficacy of RPN are needed before fully advocating this technique.

Simultaneous bilateral single-port radical nephrectomies.

The management of bilateral enhancing renal masses can be technically challenging. Simultaneous bilateral laparoscopic nephrectomies in postrenal transplant patients have been previously described, but these typically require multiple port placements in addition to a hand port. Herein, we describe simultaneous bilateral single-port laparoscopic radical nephrectomies in a postrenal transplant patient.

Comparison of complications of laparoscopic versus laparoendoscopic single site donor nephrectomy using the modified Clavien grading system.

PURPOSE: We compared postoperative complications of laparoendoscopic single site and standard laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy using a standardized complication reporting system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the records of consecutive patients who underwent a total of 663 laparoscopic living donor nephrectomies and 101 laparoendoscopic single site donor nephrectomies. All data were recorded retrospectively. The 30-day complication rate was compiled and graded using the modified Clavien complication scale. Multivariate binary logistic regression was used to determine independent predictors of complications. RESULTS: Baseline demographics were comparable between the groups. Compared to those with laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy patients who underwent laparoendoscopic single site donor nephrectomy had a shorter hospital stay and less estimated blood loss but longer operative time (p <0.05) as well as higher oral but lower intravenous in hospital analgesic requirements (p <0.05). Mean warm ischemia time was marginally lower in the laparoendoscopic single site donor nephrectomy group (3.9 vs 4 minutes, p = 0.03). At 30 days there was no difference in the overall complication rate between the laparoscopic living and laparoendoscopic single site donor nephrectomy groups (7.1% vs 7.9%, p >0.05). There were 8 major complications (grade 3 to 5) in the laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy group but only 1 in the laparoendoscopic single site group. Multivariate binary logistic regression analysis revealed that estimated blood loss was a predictor of fewer complications at 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: With appropriate patient selection and operative experience laparoendoscopic single site donor nephrectomy may be a safe procedure associated with postoperative outcomes similar to those of laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy as well as low morbidity. Using a standardized complication system can aid in counseling potential donors in the future.

Is right-sided laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy feasible?

OBJECTIVE: To present our initial experience with right-sided laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy (LESS-RDN). Laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) donor nephrectomy, although in its infancy, represents a potential exciting advancement over conventional laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN). Almost all of the reported cases thus far have been left-sided kidneys. METHODS: Between August 2009 and June 2010, a total of 85 consecutive LESS DN were performed. Of these, 6 (7%) were LESS-RDN. Donor outcomes analyzed included operative time, estimated blood loss, complications, visual analog pain scores, and recovery time. Renal vein lengths were measured on preoperative computed tomography scans. Recipient outcomes analyzed included recipient creatinine at discharge and at 1 and 3 months. All data were prospectively accrued in an institutional review board-approved database. RESULTS: Five LESS-RDN were successfully performed. One case was converted to hand-assisted laparoscopy to optimize hilar dissection. The mean (± SE) operative time until allograft extraction was 89 ± 5.1 minutes, total operative time was 146 ± 12.8 minutes, warm ischemia time was 3.9 ± 0.2 minutes, and estimated blood loss was 92 ± 27 mL. The mean renal vein length was 2.7 ± 0.3 cm. There were no perioperative complications. All allografts functioned after transplantation. When compared with a matched cohort of LESS-LDN, there was no difference in allograft function at discharge and at 1 and 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: Although technically challenging, LESS-RDN in experienced hands can be performed safely and should be considered as an alternative if it is the preferred kidney for transplantation.

Laparoendoscopic single site live donor nephrectomy: initial experience.

PURPOSE: We present our initial experience in 40 patients undergoing laparoendoscopic single site donor nephrectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively collected data on 40 consecutive patients. A single access GelPOINT™ device was inserted into the abdomen through a 4 to 5 cm periumbilical incision. We used a bariatric camera with a right angle attachment for the light cord to maximize triangulation. Parameters analyzed included warm ischemia time, operative time, estimated blood loss, visual analog pain score, time to recipient creatinine less than 3 mg/dl, and recipient creatinine at discharge home, and 3 and 6 months. RESULTS: A total of 38 left and 2 right donor nephrectomies were performed. Complete laparoendoscopic single site donor nephrectomy was successful in 38 cases. One left and 1 right case were converted to a hand assisted approach. Average ± SD body mass index was 26.1 ± 5.2 kg/m(2). Mean operative time to allograft extraction was 93.5 ± 27.5 minutes and mean total operative time was 166.7 ± 33.8 minutes. Average estimated blood loss was 106.7 ± 93.5 cc. Mean warm ischemia time was 3.96 ± 0.72 minutes. Mean hospital stay was 1.77 ± 0.43 days and median time to recipient creatinine less than 3.0 mg/dl was 54.2 ± 110.3 hours. Mean recipient creatinine at discharge home, and at 3 and 6 months was 1.48 ± 0.67, 1.29 ± 0.38 and 1.19 ± 0.34 mg/dl, respectively. Complications included hyponatremia in 1 patient, wound infection in 1, and a grade III laceration in an allograft that was sustained during extraction. CONCLUSIONS: Our initial experience with laparoendoscopic single site donor nephrectomy is encouraging. This approach to kidney donation without an extra-umbilical incision could become particularly relevant to minimize morbidity in young, healthy organ donors.

The emerging role of robotics in adrenal surgery.

Robotic surgery is being performed more frequently for a variety of urologic procedures. Since the first robotic adrenalectomy less than a decade ago, this modality has gained increased acceptance in the urologic community and has been employed with increased frequency in minimally invasive centers. This review evaluates the current literature on robotic adrenalectomy, its indications, as well as its advantages and limitations compared with other forms of surgical management of adrenal pathology.

Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal masses 7 centimeters or larger.

OBJECTIVE: To report our operative experience and oncologic outcomes for the laparoscopic management of large renal tumors. METHODS: All laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomies performed at our institution were reviewed. Thirty patients with tumors >or=7cm and a pathologic diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma were included. RESULTS: Mean operative time was 175.7+/-24.5 minutes, and mean estimated blood loss was 275.5+/-165.8 mL. No case required conversion to open radical nephrectomy. The mean hospital stay was 2.4+/-1.6 days. Four patients (13%) had minor complications. Of the 30 tumors, 18 were pathologic stage T2, 9 were stage T3a, 2 were stage T3b, and one was stage T4. At a mean follow-up of 30 months (range, 10 to 70), 22 patients (73%) were alive without evidence of recurrence, and 5 patients (17%) were alive with disease. One patient (3%) died of complications related to renal cell carcinoma, and 2 patients (7%) died from other causes. Overall survival was 90%, cancer-specific survival was 97%, and recurrence-free survival was 80%. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for large tumors is a technically challenging operation. However, in experienced hands, it is a reasonable therapeutic option for the management of larger RCC neoplasms.

Needlescopic ablation of small adrenal masses.

Needlescopic adrenal ablative therapy is an attractive therapeutic option for the management of small adrenal masses. The spectrum of neoplasms that can be ablated includes isolated solid organ metastases (lung, kidney, liver), nonisolated but symptomatic (painful) adrenal metastasis, and small, nonmetastatic, hormonally active adrenal tumors. Moreover, needlescopic ablation offers an effective minimally morbid intervention for patients who are poor surgical candidates either due to advanced age and/or significant comorbid conditions. Ablative techniques described to date include radiofrequency ablation (RFA), cryoablation, and chemical ablation. Most procedures can be performed under percutaneous radiographic guidance on an outpatient basis. By and large, the bulk of clinical experience with adrenal ablation pertains to RFA. Successful ablation is usually dependent upon lesion size, with tumors 5 cm or smaller demonstrating the highest successful ablation rates. The most frequently described adverse sequelae of adrenal ablation are local tumor recurrences. However, many of these local recurrences can be managed by repeat ablation, with patients demonstrating durable oncologic outcomes.

Laparoscopic adrenalectomy for large adrenal masses.

Open adrenalectomy has been the gold-standard therapy for adrenal neoplasms. Minimally invasive treatments, however, have assumed a more central role in the management of these lesions. The traditional benefits of laparoscopy, including reduced blood loss, shorter hospital duration, and improved convalescence, extend to adrenal disease without compromising the oncologic efficacy of the surgery. Contemporary series suggest that minimally invasive surgery is also a reasonable therapeutic modality for larger adrenal masses. Laparoscopic adrenalectomy for these large masses is a technically demanding procedure that should be undertaken by experienced laparoscopic surgeons familiar with retroperitoneal anatomy and adept with vascular techniques in the event of an open conversion. Oncologic outcomes collectively suggest that in the setting of adequate surgical resection, recurrence patterns relate more to disease-process biology than surgical approach. Neither size criteria, suspicion of malignancy, nor locally invasive disease should be considered an absolute contraindication to laparoscopic adrenalectomy.