{"title":"肾细胞癌的部分切除应扩大到什么程度?","authors":"A. Méjean","doi":"10.1016/S0003-4401(06)80026-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Conservative renal surgery for cancer has now achieved consensus for imperative, relative, and elective indications (tumor < 4 cm with healthy contralateral kidney). The results show 90%–100% 10-year survival rates and 0%–3% recurrence rates. Surgical techniques are improving and complication rates are decreasing with experience.</p><p>It is now recognized that margin thickness has no real significance provided that it is negative, even if excision is flush with the tumor capsule. Finally, the frequently cited multifocal lesions are no longer an argument against conservative surgery. The usual limitations of conservative surgery are the size and location of the tumor. Nevertheless, there is no statistically significant difference in the survival and recurrence rates between T1 a (<4 cm) and T1 b (4-7 cm) tumors, even if the risk of renal sinus fat tissue involvement increases proportionally with tumor size. Finally, resectiog tumors of the renal sinus is possible without adding to the risk of metastasis but increases the risk of surgical complications.</p><p>The risk of deteriorated renal function with radical nephrectomy is now well documented. Laparoscopy, which has become the reference treatment mode for radical nephrectomy, remains reserved for conservative surgery for exophytic tumors less than 3–4 cm because of the technical difficulties involved in resection and hemostasis.</p><p>Although conservative surgery is now recognized, extending its indications to tumors greater than 4 cm or in cases of parenchymatous location is supported by real arguments that need to be confirmed. The limit remains the surgical feasibility.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50783,"journal":{"name":"Annales D Urologie","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0003-4401(06)80026-4","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How far should partial nephrectomy be extended for renal cell carcinoma?\",\"authors\":\"A. Méjean\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/S0003-4401(06)80026-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Conservative renal surgery for cancer has now achieved consensus for imperative, relative, and elective indications (tumor < 4 cm with healthy contralateral kidney). The results show 90%–100% 10-year survival rates and 0%–3% recurrence rates. Surgical techniques are improving and complication rates are decreasing with experience.</p><p>It is now recognized that margin thickness has no real significance provided that it is negative, even if excision is flush with the tumor capsule. Finally, the frequently cited multifocal lesions are no longer an argument against conservative surgery. The usual limitations of conservative surgery are the size and location of the tumor. Nevertheless, there is no statistically significant difference in the survival and recurrence rates between T1 a (<4 cm) and T1 b (4-7 cm) tumors, even if the risk of renal sinus fat tissue involvement increases proportionally with tumor size. Finally, resectiog tumors of the renal sinus is possible without adding to the risk of metastasis but increases the risk of surgical complications.</p><p>The risk of deteriorated renal function with radical nephrectomy is now well documented. Laparoscopy, which has become the reference treatment mode for radical nephrectomy, remains reserved for conservative surgery for exophytic tumors less than 3–4 cm because of the technical difficulties involved in resection and hemostasis.</p><p>Although conservative surgery is now recognized, extending its indications to tumors greater than 4 cm or in cases of parenchymatous location is supported by real arguments that need to be confirmed. The limit remains the surgical feasibility.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50783,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annales D Urologie\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0003-4401(06)80026-4\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annales D Urologie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003440106800264\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annales D Urologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003440106800264","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
摘要
保守性肾手术治疗癌症目前已经在必要的、相对的和选择性的适应症(肿瘤;4厘米,对侧肾脏健康)。结果显示10年生存率为90%-100%,复发率为0%-3%。随着经验的积累,手术技术不断进步,并发症发生率不断降低。现在人们认识到,如果切缘厚度为阴性,即使切除与肿瘤囊齐平,切缘厚度也没有真正的意义。最后,经常被提及的多灶性病变不再是反对保守手术的理由。保守手术通常的限制是肿瘤的大小和位置。然而,T1 a (4 cm)和T1 b (4-7 cm)肿瘤的生存率和复发率没有统计学差异,即使累及肾窦脂肪组织的风险随肿瘤大小成比例增加。最后,切除肾窦肿瘤可能不会增加转移的风险,但会增加手术并发症的风险。根治性肾切除术导致肾功能恶化的风险现已得到充分证实。腹腔镜已成为根治性肾切除术的参考治疗方式,但由于切除和止血技术上的困难,对于小于3-4 cm的外生肿瘤,仍保留保守手术。虽然保守手术现已得到认可,但将其适应症扩展到大于4cm的肿瘤或实质位置的情况下,需要得到实际论证的支持。极限仍然是手术的可行性。
How far should partial nephrectomy be extended for renal cell carcinoma?
Conservative renal surgery for cancer has now achieved consensus for imperative, relative, and elective indications (tumor < 4 cm with healthy contralateral kidney). The results show 90%–100% 10-year survival rates and 0%–3% recurrence rates. Surgical techniques are improving and complication rates are decreasing with experience.
It is now recognized that margin thickness has no real significance provided that it is negative, even if excision is flush with the tumor capsule. Finally, the frequently cited multifocal lesions are no longer an argument against conservative surgery. The usual limitations of conservative surgery are the size and location of the tumor. Nevertheless, there is no statistically significant difference in the survival and recurrence rates between T1 a (<4 cm) and T1 b (4-7 cm) tumors, even if the risk of renal sinus fat tissue involvement increases proportionally with tumor size. Finally, resectiog tumors of the renal sinus is possible without adding to the risk of metastasis but increases the risk of surgical complications.
The risk of deteriorated renal function with radical nephrectomy is now well documented. Laparoscopy, which has become the reference treatment mode for radical nephrectomy, remains reserved for conservative surgery for exophytic tumors less than 3–4 cm because of the technical difficulties involved in resection and hemostasis.
Although conservative surgery is now recognized, extending its indications to tumors greater than 4 cm or in cases of parenchymatous location is supported by real arguments that need to be confirmed. The limit remains the surgical feasibility.