Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 23, Issue 9, pp 2161–2166 | Cite as

Strategies in the management of renal tumors amenable to partial nephrectomy

  • Jacob M. McClean
  • Kent W. Kercher
  • Nicole A. Mah
  • Marc Zerey
  • B. Todd Heniford
  • Pierce B. Irby
  • R. Tucker Burks
  • Carol Weida
  • Chris M. TeiglandEmail author
Dynamic Manuscript



The laparoscopic approach to radical and partial nephrectomy is becoming the standard of care for treating patients with renal tumors. Hand-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (HALPN) provides some advantages over the pure laparoscopic approach which include manual manipulation of the kidney, tactile feedback, and timely specimen removal.

Materials and methods

We describe our technique for HALPN and emphasize the implementation of an in-room pathologist to examine gross margins during the period of renal arterial occlusion. Between 2004 and 2007, 46 patients underwent HALPN performed by the same surgeons. Mean patient age was 59.5 years and mean tumor size was 2.55 cm. Twelve of these patients underwent significant concomitant procedures.


Our mean operating time was 173.26 min (range 90–306 min) and our mean warm ischemic time was 28.32 min (range 14–54 min). Average estimated blood loss was 116.82 ml (range 10–1000 ml) with no transfusions. Thirty-six (78%) tumors were renal cell carcinoma, seven (15%) were oncocytomas, and three (7%) were angiomyolipomas. The average length of stay was 5.17 days (range 3–9 days) and there were no positive margins. There was one postoperative bleed (2%) and two postoperative urine leaks (4.3%).


In our institution, the hand-assist approach to laparoscopic partial nephrectomy has resulted in favorable perioperative outcomes. The use of an in-room pathologist to provide real-time assessment of gross tumor margins has allowed us to achieve a 0% positive final margin rate. We believe that the use of an in-room pathologist during the timely extraction of the specimen made possible by the hand-assisted approach provides a great advantage over pure laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. This low positive margin rate is also the result of maintaining a bloodless field of resection with temporary renal arterial occlusion as well as the avoidance of visual tissue distortion with cold, sharp scissor dissection.


Cancer Renal (kidneys) Surgical < Technical Urology 



We would like to thank our body imaging team (Michael Lavelle, MD, James Oliver, MD, Peter Chang, MD, Stuart Hartley, MD and Richard Redvanly, MD) for their contributions to the small kidney tumor program at the Carolinas Medical Center.

Supplementary material

(WMV 14690 kb)


  1. 1.
    Beasley KA, Al Omar M, Shaikh A, Bochinski D, Khakhar A, Izawa JI, Welch RO, Chin JL, Kapoor A, Luke PPW (2004) Laparoscopic vs open partial nephrectomy. Urology 64:458–461PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gill IS, Matin SF, Desai MM, Kaouk JH, Steinberg A, Macha E, Thornton J, Sherief MH, Strzempkowski B, Novick AC (2003) Comparative analysis of laparoscopic versus open partial nephrectomy for renal tumors in 200 patients. J Urol 170:64–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kercher KW, Heniford BT, Matthews BD, Smith TI, Lincourt AE, Hayes DH, Eskind LB, Irby PB, Teigland CM (2003) Laparoscopic vs open nephrectomy in 210 consecutive patients. Surg Endosc 17:1889–1895PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Novick AC (2004) Laparoscopic and partial nephrectomy. Clin Cancer Res 10:6322–6327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Albqami N, Janetschek G (2006) Indications and contraindications for the use of laparoscopic surgery for renal cell carcinoma. Nat Clin Pract Urol 3:32–37PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schiff JD, Palese M, Vaughan ED, Sosa RE, Coll D, Del Pizzo JJ (2005) Laparoscopic vs open partial nephrectomy in consecutive patients: the Cornell experience. BJU Int 96:811–814Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shuford MD, McDougall EM, Chang SS, LaFleur BJ, Smith JA, Cookson MS (2004) Complications of contemporary radical nephrectomy: comparison of open vs. laparoscopic approach. Urol Oncol 22:121–126PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kercher KW, Joels CS, Matthews BD, Lincourt AE, Smith TI, Heniford BT (2003) Hand-assisted surgery improves outcomes for laparoscopic nephrectomy. Am Surg 69:1061–1066PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ponsky LE, Cherullo EE, Banks KLW, Greenstein M, Streem SB, Klein EA, Zippe CD (2003) Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: incorporating the advantages of hand assisted and standard laparoscopy. J Urol 169:2053–2056PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fazio LM, Downey D, Nguan CY, Karnik V, Al-Omar M, Kwan K, Izawa JI, Chin JL, Luke PPW (2006) Intraoperative laparoscopic renal ultrasonography: use in advanced laparoscopic renal surgery. Urology 68:723–727PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Merten GJ, Burgess WP, Gray LV, Holleman JH, Roush TS, Kowalchuk GJ, Bersin RM, Van Moore A, Simonton CA 3rd, Rittase RA, Norton HJ, Kennedy TP (2004) Prevention of contrast-induced nephropathy with sodium bicarbonate: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 291:2328–2334PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ramani AP, Desai MM, Steinberg AP, Ng CS, Abreu SC, Kaouk JH, Finelli A, Novick AC, Gill IS (2005) Complications of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in 200 cases. J Urol 173:42–47PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Strup SE, Hubosky S (2004) Hand-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. J Endourol 18:345–349PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brown JA, Hubosky SG, Gomella LG, Strup SE (2004) Hand assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for peripheral and central lesions: a review of 30 consecutive cases. J Urol 171:1443–1446PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lane BR, Gill IS (2007) 5-year outcomes of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. J Urol 177:70–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jacob M. McClean
    • 1
  • Kent W. Kercher
    • 2
  • Nicole A. Mah
    • 1
  • Marc Zerey
    • 2
  • B. Todd Heniford
    • 2
  • Pierce B. Irby
    • 1
  • R. Tucker Burks
    • 3
  • Carol Weida
    • 3
  • Chris M. Teigland
    • 1
    • 4
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of UrologyCarolinas Medical CenterCharlotteUSA
  2. 2.Department of General SurgeryCarolinas Medical CenterCharlotteUSA
  3. 3.Department of PathologyCarolinas Medical CenterCharlotteUSA
  4. 4.CharlotteUSA

Personalised recommendations