Scholarlink

<p>The surgical management of pathologic T3a (pT3a) renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains contentious due to the lack of high-level evidence guiding the choice between partial nephrectomy (PN) and radical nephrectomy (RN). This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate whether PN represents a safe and effective alternative to RN. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus was conducted through July 2025. The study included comparative trials of adult pT3a RCC patients undergoing PN or RN, focusing on oncological, perioperative, and functional outcomes. Sixteen retrospective studies involving 34,304 patients (5878 PN; 28426 RN) were analyzed. There were no statistically significant differences between PN and RN regarding estimated blood loss, operative time, hospital stay, or major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo &gt; 2). PN was associated with significantly better preservation of renal function (9.96; I<sup>2</sup> 0%; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01), higher rate of positive surgical margins (0.82; I<sup>2</sup> 49.2%; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01), lower tumor size (-2.6; I<sup>2</sup> 99.4%; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01). PN is a safe and feasible alternative for pT3a RCC cases, providing superior functional preservation without compromising perioperative safety or oncological control.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Partial versus radical nephrectomy for pT3a renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月21日

查看全文
  • Filippo Gavi,
  • Francesco Rossi,
  • Daniele Fettucciari,
  • Giuseppe Pallotta,
  • Antonio Silvestri,
  • Cristina Carerj,
  • Vincenzo Cavarra,
  • Domenico Sanesi,
  • Francesco Pio Bizzarri,
  • Marco Montesi,
  • Simone Assumma,
  • Enrico Panio,
  • Pierluigi Russo,
  • Mauro Ragonese,
  • Nazario Foschi,
  • Filippo Turri,
  • Maria Chiara Sighinolfi,
  • Bernardo Rocco

摘要

The surgical management of pathologic T3a (pT3a) renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains contentious due to the lack of high-level evidence guiding the choice between partial nephrectomy (PN) and radical nephrectomy (RN). This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate whether PN represents a safe and effective alternative to RN. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus was conducted through July 2025. The study included comparative trials of adult pT3a RCC patients undergoing PN or RN, focusing on oncological, perioperative, and functional outcomes. Sixteen retrospective studies involving 34,304 patients (5878 PN; 28426 RN) were analyzed. There were no statistically significant differences between PN and RN regarding estimated blood loss, operative time, hospital stay, or major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo > 2). PN was associated with significantly better preservation of renal function (9.96; I2 0%; p < 0.01), higher rate of positive surgical margins (0.82; I2 49.2%; p < 0.01), lower tumor size (-2.6; I2 99.4%; p < 0.01). PN is a safe and feasible alternative for pT3a RCC cases, providing superior functional preservation without compromising perioperative safety or oncological control.