Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology

, Volume 142, Issue 7, pp 1651–1657 | Cite as

Oncological outcomes of patients with incidental pathological T3a stage small renal cell carcinoma after partial nephrectomy

  • Chunwoo Lee
  • Dalsan You
  • Sangjun Yoo
  • Cheryn Song
  • Bumsik Hong
  • Jun Hyuk Hong
  • Hanjong Ahn
  • Choung-Soo KimEmail author
Original Article – Clinical Oncology



This study was designed to evaluate and compare the oncological outcomes of patients with pathological T1a (pT1a) small renal cell carcinomas (RCCs) with those with incidental pathological T3a (pT3a) RCCs who have been treated using partial nephrectomy (PN).


We retrospectively evaluated the records of 1367 consecutive patients who underwent PN for small RCCs (≤4 cm) between 1997 and 2014. The curves for recurrence-free, cancer-specific, and overall survival were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Cox regression analysis was used to estimate the prognostic significance of each variable.


Of the 1367 small RCC patients identified, 1324 (96.8 %) had pT1a lesions and 43 (3.2 %) had pT3a lesions. The median ages of the pT1a and pT3a patients were 53.9 and 58.1 years, respectively. Patients received follow-up for a median of 54 months. The 5- and 10-year RFS rates in patients with pT1a and pT3a RCCs were 98.0 and 95.2 %, and 94.4 and 95.2 %, respectively (P = 0.521). None of the patients with recurrent tumors in the pT3a group have died by the time of the writing of this report. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model showed that tumor size was a significant predictor of RFS and CSS (P < 0.05). However, pT stage (pT3a vs. pT1a) was not a significant predictor of RFS, CSS, or OS (P = 0.104, P = 0.573, and P = 0.441, respectively).


Our study found that pT3a stage disease following PN for small RCCs (≤4 cm) had similar oncological outcomes to those of pT1a stage.


Carcinoma Renal cell Partial nephrectomy T1a T3a Oncological outcome 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This study was performed with the approval and oversight of the Institutional Review Board of Asan Medical Center.

Human rights

This article does not contain any studies on human participants that were performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was not obtained from all of the individual participants included in this study because of its retrospective design.


  1. Aboumarzouk OM, Stein RJ, Eyraud R, Haber GP, Chlosta PL, Somani BK, Kaouk JH (2012) Robotic versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 62:1023–1033CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bensalah K, Pantuck AJ, Rioux-Leclercq N, Thuret R, Montorsi F, Karakiewicz PI, Mottet N, Zini L, Bertini R, Salomon L, Villers A, Soulie M, Bellec L, Rischmann P, De la Taille A, Avakian R, Crepel M, Ferriere JM, Bernhard JC, Dujardin T, Pouliot F, Rigaud J, Pfister C, Albouy B, Guy L, Joniau S, van Poppel H, Lebret T, Culty T, Saint F, Zisman A, Raz O, Lang H, Spie R, Wille A, Roigas J, Aguilera A, Rambeaud B, Martinez Pineiro L, Nativ O, Farfara R, Richard F, Roupret M, Doehn C, Bastian PJ, Muller SC, Tostain J, Belldegrun AS, Patard JJ (2010) Positive surgical margin appears to have negligible impact on survival of renal cell carcinomas treated by nephron-sparing surgery. Eur Urol 57:466–471CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Breda A, Stepanian SV, Liao J, Lam JS, Guazzoni G, Stifelman M, Perry K, Celia A, Breda G, Fornara P, Jackman S, Rosales A, Palou J, Grasso M, Pansadoro V, Disanto V, Porpiglia F, Milani C, Abbou C, Gaston R, Janetschek G, Soomro NA, de la Rosette J, Laguna MP, Schulam PG (2007) Positive margins in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in 855 cases: a multi-institutional survey from the United States and Europe. J Urol 178:47–50 (discussion 50) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Campbell SC, Novick AC, Belldegrun A, Blute ML, Chow GK, Derweesh IH, Faraday MM, Kaouk JH, Leveillee RJ, Matin SF, Russo P, Uzzo RG (2009) Guideline for management of the clinical T1 renal mass. J Urol 182:1271–1279CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Clark PE, Schover LR, Uzzo RG, Hafez KS, Rybicki LA, Novick AC (2001) Quality of life and psychological adaptation after surgical treatment for localized renal cell carcinoma: impact of the amount of remaining renal tissue. Urology 57:252–256CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Dash A, Vickers AJ, Schachter LR, Bach AM, Snyder ME, Russo P (2006) Comparison of outcomes in elective partial vs radical nephrectomy for clear cell renal cell carcinoma of 4–7 cm. BJU Int 97:939–945CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Fuhrman SA, Lasky LC, Limas C (1982) Prognostic significance of morphologic parameters in renal cell carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 6:655–663CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Huang WC, Levey AS, Serio AM, Snyder M, Vickers AJ, Raj GV, Scardino PT, Russo P (2006) Chronic kidney disease after nephrectomy in patients with renal cortical tumours: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol 7:735–740CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Huang WC, Elkin EB, Levey AS, Jang TL, Russo P (2009) Partial nephrectomy versus radical nephrectomy in patients with small renal tumors—is there a difference in mortality and cardiovascular outcomes? J Urol 181:55–61 (discussion 61–52) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Jang HJ, Song W, Suh YS, Jeong US, Jeon HG, Jeong BC, Jeon SS, Lee HM, Choi HY, Seo SI (2014) Comparison of perioperative outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for complex renal tumors (RENAL nephrometry score of 7 or higher). Korean J Urol 55:808–813CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Jeldres C, Patard JJ, Capitanio U, Perrotte P, Suardi N, Crepel M, Ficarra V, Cindolo L, de La Taille A, Tostain J, Pfister C, Albouy B, Colombel M, Mejean A, Lang H, Jacqmin D, Bernhard JC, Ferriere JM, Bensalah K, Karakiewicz PI (2009) Partial versus radical nephrectomy in patients with adverse clinical or pathologic characteristics. Urology 73:1300–1305CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Kwon EO, Carver BS, Snyder ME, Russo P (2007) Impact of positive surgical margins in patients undergoing partial nephrectomy for renal cortical tumours. BJU Int 99:286–289CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Lane BR, Campbell SC, Gill IS (2013) 10-year oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy. J Urol 190:44–49CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Lau WK, Blute ML, Weaver AL, Torres VE, Zincke H (2000) Matched comparison of radical nephrectomy vs nephron-sparing surgery in patients with unilateral renal cell carcinoma and a normal contralateral kidney. Mayo Clin Proc 75:1236–1242CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Ljungberg B, Bensalah K, Canfield S, Dabestani S, Hofmann F, Hora M, Kuczyk MA, Lam T, Marconi L, Merseburger AS, Mulders P, Powles T, Staehler M, Volpe A, Bex A (2015) EAU guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: 2014 update. Eur Urol 67:913–924CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Louis R, Kavoussi AWP, Novick AC, Peters CA (2012) Campbell-Walsh urology, 10th edn. Elsevier, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  17. Mitchell RE, Gilbert SM, Murphy AM, Olsson CA, Benson MC, McKiernan JM (2006) Partial nephrectomy and radical nephrectomy offer similar cancer outcomes in renal cortical tumors 4 cm or larger. Urology 67:260–264CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Oh JJ, Byun SS, Lee SE, Hong SK, Lee ES, Kim HH, Kwak C, Ku JH, Jeong CW, Kim YJ, Kang SH, Hong SH (2014) Partial nephrectomy versus radical nephrectomy for non-metastatic pathological T3a renal cell carcinoma: a multi-institutional comparative analysis. Int J Urol 21:352–357CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Patard JJ, Shvarts O, Lam JS, Pantuck AJ, Kim HL, Ficarra V, Cindolo L, Han KR, De La Taille A, Tostain J, Artibani W, Abbou CC, Lobel B, Chopin DK, Figlin RA, Mulders PF, Belldegrun AS (2004) Safety and efficacy of partial nephrectomy for all T1 tumors based on an international multicenter experience. J Urol 171:2181–2185 (quiz 2435) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Sprenkle PC, Power N, Ghoneim T, Touijer KA, Dalbagni G, Russo P, Coleman JA (2012) Comparison of open and minimally invasive partial nephrectomy for renal tumors 4–7 centimeters. Eur Urol 61:593–599CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Springer C, Hoda MR, Fajkovic H, Pini G, Mohammed N, Fornara P, Greco F (2013) Laparoscopic vs open partial nephrectomy for T1 renal tumours: evaluation of long-term oncological and functional outcomes in 340 patients. BJU Int 111:281–288CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Stephen B, Edge AGF, Byrd DR, Greene FL, Compton CC, Trotti A (2009) American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging manual, 7th edn. Springer, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  23. van Oostenbrugge TJ, Kroeze SG, Bosch JL, van Melick HH (2015) The blind spots in follow-up after nephrectomy or nephron-sparing surgery for localized renal cell carcinoma. World J Urol 33:881–887CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Yossepowitch O, Thompson RH, Leibovich BC, Eggener SE, Pettus JA, Kwon ED, Herr HW, Blute ML, Russo P (2008) Positive surgical margins at partial nephrectomy: predictors and oncological outcomes. J Urol 179:2158–2163CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chunwoo Lee
    • 1
  • Dalsan You
    • 2
  • Sangjun Yoo
    • 2
  • Cheryn Song
    • 2
  • Bumsik Hong
    • 2
  • Jun Hyuk Hong
    • 2
  • Hanjong Ahn
    • 2
  • Choung-Soo Kim
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Urology, Gyeongsang National University Changwon HospitalGyeongsang National University School of MedicineChangwonKorea
  2. 2.Department of Urology, Asan Medical CenterUniversity of Ulsan College of MedicineSeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations