Laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy in T1-T2 renal carcinoma: personal 5-year experience about the oncologic outcome.

AIM Since 1990 when it was firstly performed, radical laparoscopic nephrectomy has gained wide popularity because of its less morbidity and adequate oncologic outcome. The aim of this study was to report our experience about oncologic 5-year outcome of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. METHODS Fifteen patients were treated laparoscopically and retrospectively compared to a group of patients treated laparotomically, omogeneous for age, stage of disease and comorbidities. RESULTS There was no conversion in the laparoscopic group and duration of both procedure showed no statistical difference. Laparoscopic procedures showed less intraoperative blood loss, less postoperative ileus, shorter hospitalization and less morbidity, all with statistical significance. Overall 5 years survival showed no statistical significant difference in the two groups (88.9% laparoscopic group vs. 86.2% laparotomic group). CONCLUSION Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy has clear advantages compared to the traditional surgery, especially about less morbidity, less blood loss, shorter hospitalization, with an oncologic outcome absolutely comparable to the laparotomic procedure. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is a safe and oncologically adequate surgical procedure with clear advantages compared to the its open counterpart, so it must be considered as a valid alternative to laparotomic surgery in case of non metastatic T1-T2 kidney cancer.