Open surgery versus retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy for renal tuberculosis: a retrospective study of 120 patients

Background Laparoscopic renal surgery has been widely used in the treatment of renal diseases. However, there is still little research about its application in addressing renal tuberculosis. The purpose of this study is to retrospectively investigate the surgical results of laparoscopic and open surgery for nonfunctional tuberculous kidneys. Methods Between May 2011 and June 2016, 120 nephrectomies were performed in patients with a nonfunctional tuberculous kidney. Of these, 69 patients underwent retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy, and 51 patients underwent open nephrectomy. Data about the patients’ characteristics and surgical outcomes were collected from their electronic medical records. Outcomes were compared between these two groups. Results Our results showed that a number of renal tuberculosis patients presented no significant symptoms during their disease. Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) were the most common at a rate of 73/120, followed by flank pain or accidently discovery (66/120), urine abnormality (30/120) and fever (27/120). Patients who underwent open surgery were similar to laparoscopic patients with regard to sex, BMI, location, previous tuberculous history, grade, anemia, adhesion, hypertension, diabetes and preoperative serum creatinine level, but were generally older than laparoscopic patients. There were no significant differences between open and laparoscopic surgery in estimated blood loss, transfusion, postoperative hospital days and perioperative complication rate. However, the median operation time of laparoscopic operation was much longer than open surgery (180 [150–225] vs 135 [120–165] minutes, P < 0.01). Seven of the 69 laparoscopic operations were converted to open surgery because of severe adhesions. Conclusion Laparoscopic nephrectomy is as an effective treatment as open surgery for a nonfunctional tuberculous kidney, although it requires more time during the surgical procedure. No significant differences in other surgical outcomes were observed.

[1]  Song Fan,et al.  Renal tuberculosis tends to be low symptoms: how to improve the diagnosis and treatment of renal tuberculosis , 2015, Asian Journal of Andrology.

[2]  R. Chaisson,et al.  Latent Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[3]  J. Shin,et al.  Drug-resistance pattern of Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains from patients with pulmonary and extrapulmonary tuberculosis during 2006 to 2013 in a Korean tertiary medical center , 2015, The Korean journal of internal medicine.

[4]  N. Xing,et al.  Retroperitoneal Laparoscopic Nephroureterectomy for Tuberculous Nonfunctioning Kidneys: a single-center experience , 2015, International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology.

[5]  R. Sinha,et al.  Prospective randomized comparison of transperitoneal vs retroperitoneal laparoscopic simple nephrectomy. , 2014, Urology.

[6]  Jie Jin,et al.  [Epidemiology and clinical features of renal tuberculosis: 239 cases report]. , 2013, Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences.

[7]  F. Zhou,et al.  Complications of radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: a retrospective study comparing transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches using a standardized reporting methodology in two Chinese centers , 2013, Chinese journal of cancer.

[8]  Tianxin Lin,et al.  Comparison of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta‐analysis , 2013, BJU international.

[9]  N. Khan,et al.  Extrapulmonary tuberculosis in Kabul, Afghanistan: a hospital-based retrospective review. , 2010, International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases.

[10]  A. Hemal,et al.  Laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy for large renal tumors: a long-term prospective comparison. , 2007, The Journal of urology.

[11]  S. Lenk,et al.  EAU guidelines for the management of genitourinary tuberculosis. , 2005, European urology.

[12]  Hong-zhao Li,et al.  Comparison of retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy versus open approaches to nonfunctioning tuberculous kidneys: a report of 44 cases. , 2005, The Journal of urology.

[13]  Z. Ye,et al.  Retroperitoneoscopic subcapsular nephrectomy for infective nonfunctioning kidney with dense perinephric adhesions , 2004, BJU international.

[14]  N. Demartines,et al.  Classification of Surgical Complications: A New Proposal With Evaluation in a Cohort of 6336 Patients and Results of a Survey , 2004, Annals of Surgery.

[15]  C. Kwak,et al.  Laparoscopic nephrectomy for tuberculous nonfunctioning kidney: comparison with laparoscopic simple nephrectomy for other diseases. , 2002, Urology.

[16]  A. Hemal,et al.  Comparison of retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy with open surgery for tuberculous nonfunctioning kidneys. , 2000, The Journal of urology.

[17]  Hyeon-Hoe Kim,et al.  Laparoscopic nephrectomy for nonfunctioning tuberculous kidney. , 2000, Journal of endourology.

[18]  J. Rassweiler,et al.  Laparoscopic nephrectomy: the experience of the laparoscopy working group of the German Urologic Association. , 1998, The Journal of urology.

[19]  H. May,et al.  [Diagnosis and treatment of renal tuberculosis]. , 1957, Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift.