alexa Composite Outcome Measures in Nephron-Sparing Surgery | OMICS International
ISSN: 2472-1220
Journal of Kidney

Like us on:

Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700+ peer reviewed, Open Access Journals that operates with the help of 50,000+ Editorial Board Members and esteemed reviewers and 1000+ Scientific associations in Medical, Clinical, Pharmaceutical, Engineering, Technology and Management Fields.
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Conferenceseries Events with over 600+ Conferences, 1200+ Symposiums and 1200+ Workshops on
Medical, Pharma, Engineering, Science, Technology and Business

Composite Outcome Measures in Nephron-Sparing Surgery

Ong WM1 and Zargar H1,2*

1Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia

2Australian Prostate Cancer Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia

*Corresponding Author:
Homayoun Zargar
Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne
E-mail: [email protected]om

Received Date: January 05, 2016; Accepted Date: January 12, 2016; Published Date: January 27, 2016

Citation: Ong WM, Zargar H (2016) Composite Outcome Measures in Nephron- Sparing Surgery. J Kidney 2:111. doi:10.4172/2472-1220.1000111

Copyright: © 2016 Ong WM, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Visit for more related articles at Journal of Kidney


Nephron-sparing surgery (NSS) has become the standard of surgical management in small renal masses (SRM) due to its ability to achieve similar outcomes as compared to radical nephrectomy, with the additional preservation of renal function. The concept of ‚trifecta’ and ‘MIC’ (margin, ischaemia and complications) in the setting of NSS, were introduced as measures of quality of surgical management and serve as standardised tools for comparing outcomes in NSS. Although the definitions of ‚trifecta’ show slight variation across published literature, they encompass the desire to avoid complications, achieve optimum oncological outcomes and maximise functional renal preservation peri-operatively.

A review of the published literature reveals a gamut of definitions of complications ranging from zero complication to no major or urological complications. Despite the differences in defining complications, the general consensus is to achieve negative surgical margins intraoperatively as an indirect measure of oncological safety outcomes. However, consensus on appropriate treatment in patients with positive histological surgical margins has yet to be established to date.

With regard to functional outcomes, warm ischaemia time (WIT) has been largely used as a predictor in renal functional outcomes. Research has shown a negative correlation between the prolongation of the duration of WIT and renal function outcomes in the long term [1,2]. However, WIT may not be the strongest predictor of the final renal function — the volume of preserved functional parenchyma and baseline renal function are independent predictors of functional outcomes [3,4]. In most available literature, serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) have been the cornerstone of assessing post-operative preserved renal function. However, such methods are largely limited in their ability to assess the level of preserved renal function in the operated kidney as the contralateral kidney often compensates for lost function post-operatively. Sophisticated mathematical formulas to estimate resected and ischaemic volume (RAIV) [5], computed tomography (CT) volumetric analysis [3] and tumour contact surface area [6] have also been enlisted in an attempt to circumvent this limitation, but unfortunately require labour-intensive renal volume measurement and advanced imaging technology. Where MAG3 renal scan available, it enables the assessment of split renal function at baseline and post-operatively, allowing reliable evaluation of the functional outcomes of NSS [7]. Table 1 provides a summary of some of the published methods for assessing functional outcomes after NSS.

Fergany et al. [8] 117 PN Cr Increased dialysis-free period with NSS
Lucas et al. [9] 27 RAPN, 15 LPN, 54 OPN WIT, eGFR (MDRD) & Cr WIT longer in RAPN vs. OPN but similar post-op renal function. eGFR lower in post-op LPN vs. OPN but similar in long term
Froghiet al. [10] 92 RAPN, 140 LPN WIT Decrease in WIT with RAPN but similar functional outcomes
Zhang et al. [11] 425 RAPN, 341 LPN WIT Similar outcomes peri-operatively but shorter WIT for RAPN approach
Park et al. [4] 98 OPN WIT, Cr No significant difference baseline eGFR and Cr at pre-op, discharge and 6-month.
Baseline function more accurate in predicting poor renal functional outcomes
Yossepowitchet al. [12] 662 NSS with cold ischaemia time eGFR (MDRD) Early changes in GFR after NSS significantly influenced by duration of cold renal ischaemia but does not appear to influence long-term renal functional outcomes
Springer et al. [13] 190 LESS-PN eGFR (MDRD), CKD staging Cr increased significantly post-op immediately and at 6/12. Significant increase in percentage of patients with CKD III-IV. WIT <20 min in 45/120 robot-assisted LESS-PN with no decreased renal function.
Lau et al. [14] 1492 RN vs 1189 NSS Cr, Proteinuria, CKD staging RN proves to have worse renal functional outcomes
Leslie et al. [6] 200 PN CSA of tumour CSA is an independent predictor of peri-operative complications and renal functional outcomes
Porpiglia et al. [15] 18 LPN with WIT >30 mins WIT, AAP/GGT/ lysozyme proteinuria Worse renal outcomes if WIT between 32-42 mins as confirmed on MAG3 scan
Simmons et al. [16] 138 OPN + LPN CT, eGFR (MDRD) 96% correlation between predicted and observed change in eGFR - pre-op GFR and PFVP are primary determinants of long-term functional outcomes
Shin TY et al. [5] 217 RAPN RAIV vs. Cr &eGFR (MDRD) Superior correlation with absolute and % percentage change in eGFR compared to Cr and MDRD formula
Zargaret al. [17] 1185 RPN, 646 LPN WIT, MAG3, CKD staging Median WIT significantly longer in LPN vs. RPN (26 min vs. 18 min) . No significant difference between RPN & LPN in GFR preservation or proportion of patients with CKD upstaging
Mir et al. [3] 92 NSS eGFR, CT WIT did not correlate with %GFR preserved but lower R.E.N.A.L. scores & use of hypothermia& volume of preserved parenchyma are predictive factors of %GFR preserved

Table 1: Renal function measurements and outcomes in partial nephrectomy series.

A recent study confirmed the utility of trifecta and MIC for assessment of functional outcomes after NSS [7]. Achievement of each of this composite outcomes correlated with better functional outcomes post-operatively assess by MAG3 renal scan validating their utility as surrogates for functional renal preservation post-partial nephrectomy.

In the era of minimally invasive surgeries, there has been a gradual transition towards adopting a robotic approach in kidney surgery. A recent meta-analysis by Zhang et al. [11] reported similar peri-operative outcomes in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) as compared to laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN), with significantly shorter WIT in the robotic approach. Composite outcomes can prove to be useful tools in comparing outcomes between different surgical approaches (Table 2). The favourable results of RAPN reported by Zhang et al were replicated and surpassed LPN in a recent published study [20], where RAPN achieved a trifecta rate in 27.1% more cases than in LPN.

  Study Size Surgical Technique Study Type Definition Trifecta Rate % Tumour size
Zargaret al. [17] 2392 646 LPN vs. 1185 RAPN Comparative case series Trifecta WIT ≤ 25min, NSM, no major complications 70% RAPN, 33% LPN T1a, T1b
Komninoset al. [18] 167 89 RAPN vs. 78 R-LESS PN Comparative case series Trifecta WIT <20 mins, NSM, no surgical complications 42.7% in multiport RAPN, 25.6% R-LESS PN T1a
Minerviniet al. [19] 450 301 OPN vs. 149 LPN Matched comparative case series Trifecta NSM, WIT <25 min, no complications 78.6% OPN, 74.3% LPN T1a
Khalifehet al. [20] 492 261 RAPN vs. 231 LPN Case comparative series Trifecta WIT <25min, NSM, peri-operative complication 58.7% RAPN vs. 31.6% LPN T1a
Hung et al. [2] 534 RAPN / LPN Case series Trifecta NSM, renal function loss <10%, no urological complications 45-68% Mostly T1a
Buffiet al. [21] 99 RAPN Case series MIC NSM, WIT<20 mins, no major complications 75.8% T1a/T1b
Porpiglia et al. [22] 206 LPN Case series MIC NSM, WIT <20 mins, no major complications 63.1% Mostly T1a

Table 2: Composite outcomes in partial nephrectomy series: an overview.

With increased comfort in performing RAPN, the number of NSS is on the rise. As such, standardisation of reporting of results and more reliable tools for measurement of outcomes are essential in establishing robust data to serve as a benchmark for gauging surgical quality and assess for attainability of ‘nephron-sparing’ in NSS.


Select your language of interest to view the total content in your interested language
Post your comment

Share This Article

Relevant Topics

Recommended Conferences

  • International Conference on Medical and Health Science
    August 24-25, 2018 Tokyo, Japan
  • 11th International Conference on Clinical and Medical Case Reports
    October 22-23, 2018 Istanbul, Turkey

Article Usage

  • Total views: 8140
  • [From(publication date):
    March-2016 - Jul 18, 2018]
  • Breakdown by view type
  • HTML page views : 8086
  • PDF downloads : 54

Review summary

  1. Argele Intili
    Posted on Oct 21 2016 at 4:45 pm
    The authors narrated the advantages of nephron sparing surgery in the surgical treatment of renal masses as compared to radical nephrectomy. The article is precise and explanatory. The information presented in the article will help in creating awareness among the general public and medical community regarding the application of nephron sparing surgery.

Post your comment

captcha   Reload  Can't read the image? click here to refresh

Peer Reviewed Journals
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2018-19
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

Agri & Aquaculture Journals

Dr. Krish

[email protected]

+1-702-714-7001Extn: 9040

Biochemistry Journals

Datta A

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Business & Management Journals


[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Chemistry Journals

Gabriel Shaw

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9040

Clinical Journals

Datta A

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Engineering Journals

James Franklin

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Food & Nutrition Journals

Katie Wilson

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

General Science

Andrea Jason

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9043

Genetics & Molecular Biology Journals

Anna Melissa

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9006

Immunology & Microbiology Journals

David Gorantl

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9014

Materials Science Journals

Rachle Green

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Nursing & Health Care Journals

Stephanie Skinner

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Medical Journals

Nimmi Anna

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9038

Neuroscience & Psychology Journals

Nathan T

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9041

Pharmaceutical Sciences Journals

Ann Jose

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9007

Social & Political Science Journals

Steve Harry

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

© 2008- 2018 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version