You are prohibited from using or uploading content you accessed through this website into external applications, bots, software, or websites, including those using artificial intelligence technologies and infrastructure, including deep learning, machine learning and large language models and generative AI.
No AccessJournal of UrologyAdult Urology1 Mar 2020

Impact of Resection Technique on Perioperative Outcomes and Surgical Margins after Partial Nephrectomy for Localized Renal Masses: A Prospective Multicenter Study

View All Author Information


The impact of resection technique on partial nephrectomy outcomes is controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the pattern of resection techniques during partial nephrectomy and the impact on perioperative outcomes, acute kidney injury, positive surgical margins and the achievement of the Trifecta (negative surgical margins, no perioperative Clavien-Dindo grade 2 or greater surgical complications and no postoperative acute kidney injury).

Materials and Methods:

We prospectively collected data on consecutive patients with cT1-2N0M0 renal masses treated with partial nephrectomy at a total of 16 referral centers from September 2014 to March 2015. After partial nephrectomy the resection technique was classified by the surgeon as enucleation, enucleoresection or resection according to the SIB (Surface-Intermediate-Base) margin scores 0 to 2, 3 or 4 and 5, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was done to evaluate the potential impact of the resection technique on postoperative surgical complications, positive surgical margins, acute kidney injury and Trifecta achievement.


Overall 507 patients were included in analysis. The resection technique was classified as enucleation in 266 patients (52%), enucleoresection in 150 (30%) and resection in 91 (18%). The resection technique (enucleoresection vs enucleation and resection) was the only significant predictor of positive surgical margins. Tumor complexity, surgical approach (open and laparoscopic vs robotic) and resection technique (enucleoresection vs enucleation) were significant predictors of Clavien-Dindo grade 2 or greater surgical complications. The surgical approach (open and laparoscopic vs robotic), the resection technique (enucleoresection vs enucleation) and warm ischemia time were significantly associated with postoperative acute kidney injury and Trifecta achievement.


Resection techniques significantly impact surgical complications, early functional outcomes and positive surgical margins after partial nephrectomy of localized renal masses.


  • 1. : European Association of Urology Guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: the 2019 update. Eur Urol 2019; 75: 799. Google Scholar
  • 2. : Renal mass and localized renal cancer: AUA guideline. J Urol 2017; 198: 520. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 3. : Excisional precision matters: understanding the influence of excisional volume loss on renal function after partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol 2017; 72: 168. Google Scholar
  • 4. : Tumor enucleation for sporadic localized kidney cancer: pro and con. J Urol 2015; 194: 623. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 5. : Variability in partial nephrectomy outcomes: does your surgeon matter?Eur Urol 2019; 75: 628. Google Scholar
  • 6. : Positive surgical margins and local recurrence after simple enucleation and standard partial nephrectomy for malignant renal tumors: systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of prevalence. Minerva Urol Nefrol 2017; 69: 523. Google Scholar
  • 7. : Simple tumor enucleation may not decrease oncologic outcomes for T1 renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Urol Oncol 2017; 35: 661.e15. Google Scholar
  • 8. : Suture techniques during laparoscopic and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and quantitative synthesis of peri-operative outcomes. BJU Int 2019; 123: 923. Google Scholar
  • 9. : Renal preservation and partial nephrectomy: patient and surgical factors. Eur Urol Focus 2016; 2: 589. Google Scholar
  • 10. : Functional comparison of renal tumor enucleation versus standard partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol Focus 2017; 3: 437. Google Scholar
  • 11. : A literature review of renal surgical anatomy and surgical strategies for partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol 2015; 68: 980. Google Scholar
  • 12. : Standardized reporting of resection technique during nephron-sparing surgery: the surface-intermediate-base margin score. Eur Urol 2014; 66: 803. Google Scholar
  • 13. : Ischemia techniques in nephron-sparing surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes. Eur Urol 2019; 75: 477. Google Scholar
  • 14. : Oncologic safety of robotic partial nephrectomy: setting tiles in the mosaic of evidence while designing future research projects. Eur Urol Focus 2019; 5: 357. Google Scholar
  • 15. : No surgical innovation without evaluation: the IDEAL recommendations. Lancet 2009; 374: 1105. Google Scholar
  • 16. : Re: Raj Satkunasivam, Sheaumei Tsai, Sumeet Syan, et al. Robotic unclamped “minimal-margin” partial nephrectomy: ongoing refinement of the anatomic zero-ischemia concept. Eur Urol 2015; 68:705-12. Eur Urol 2016; 70: e47. Google Scholar
  • 17. : Histopathological validation of the surface-intermediate-base margin score for standardized reporting of resection technique during nephron sparing surgery. J Urol 2015; 194: 916. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 18. : External histopathological validation of the surface-intermediate-base margin score. Urol Oncol 2017; 35: 215. Google Scholar
  • 19. : From PADUA to R.E.N.A.L. Score and vice versa: development and validation of a mathematical converter. J Urol 2019; 201: 674. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 20. : A new equation to estimate glomerular filtration rate. Ann Intern Med 2009; 150: 604. Google Scholar
  • 21. Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) CKD Work Group: KDIGO 2012 clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and management of chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int, suppl., 2013; 3: 1. Google Scholar
  • 22. : Acute renal failure—definition, outcome measures, animal models, fluid therapy and information technology needs: the Second International Consensus Conference of the Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative (ADQI) Group. Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative Workgroup. Crit Care 2004; 8: R204. Google Scholar
  • 23. : Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 2004; 240: 205. Google Scholar
  • 24. : Histological analysis of the kidney tumor-parenchyma interface. J Urol 2015; 193: 415. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 25. : Tumor-parenchyma interface and long-term oncologic outcomes after robotic tumor enucleation for sporadic renal cell carcinoma. Urol Oncol 2018; 36: 527.e1. Google Scholar
  • 26. : Impact of surgical factors on robotic partial nephrectomy outcomes: comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis. J Urol 2018; 200: 258. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 27. : Assessment of volume preservation performed before or after partial nephrectomy accurately predicts postoperative renal function: results from a prospective multicenter study. Urol Oncol 2019; 37: 33. Google Scholar
  • 28. : Role of clinical and surgical factors for the prediction of immediate, early and late functional results, and its relationship with cardiovascular outcome after partial nephrectomy: results from the prospective multicenter RECORd 1 project. J Urol 2018; 199: 927. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 29. : The predictive role of biomarkers for the detection of acute kidney injury after partial or radical nephrectomy: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol Focus 2018; doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2018.09.020. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 30. : A nomogram to predict significant estimated glomerular filtration rate reduction after robotic partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol 2018; 74: 833. Google Scholar

The corresponding author certifies that, when applicable, a statement(s) has been included in the manuscript documenting institutional review board, ethics committee or ethical review board study approval; principles of Helsinki Declaration were followed in lieu of formal ethics committee approval; institutional animal care and use committee approval; all human subjects provided written informed consent with guarantees of confidentiality; IRB approved protocol number; animal approved project number.

No direct or indirect commercial, personal, academic, political, religious or ethical incentive is associated with publishing this article.