Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 26, Issue 11, pp 3774–3781 | Cite as

Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Open Radical Nephroureterectomy for Patients with T3N0M0 Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Multicenter Cohort Study with Adjustment by Propensity Score Matching

  • Keisuke Shigeta
  • Eiji KikuchiEmail author
  • Takayuki Abe
  • Masayuki Hagiwara
  • Koichiro Ogihara
  • Tadanori Anno
  • Kota Umeda
  • Yuto Baba
  • Tansei Sanjo
  • Kazunori Shojo
  • Ryuichi Mizuno
  • Mototsugu Oya
Urologic Oncology



This study aimed to investigate the long-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy (LRNU) and open radical nephroureterectomy (ORNU) for patients with clinical and pathologic T3N0M0 upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC).


Among 375 UTUC patients who underwent radical nephroureterectomy, this study identified 144 pT3N0M0 patients as cohort 1 after propensity score (PS) matching. Among 399 UTUC patients, the study identified 110 cT3N0M0 patients as cohort 2 after PS matching. Oncologic outcomes such as intravesical recurrence-free survival (IVRFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were assessed by multivariate Cox’s regression analysis.


Cohort 1 of pT3N0M0 UTUC had 3-year CSS and IVRFS rates of 67.9 and 52.7%, respectively, in the LRNU group, which were significantly lower than in the ORNU group (81.4%, p = 0.039 and 71.6%, p = 0.046). The multivariate Cox’s regression analysis identified the type of surgical approach (LRNU vs. ORNU) as one of the independent prognostic factors for CSS (hazard rate [HR], 1.88, p = 0.043) and IVRFS (HR, 1.75, p = 0.049). Cohort 2 of cT3N0M0 UTUC had 3-year CSS and IVRFS rates of 48.5 and 41.4%, respectively, in the LRNU group, which were significantly lower than in the ORNU group (65.8%, p = 0.049 and 67.2%, p = 0.047), and the type of surgical approach (LRNU vs. ORNU) remained as one of the independent prognostic factors for CSS and IVRFS.


Based on clinical and pathologic T3N0M0 UTUC populations after PS adjustments, LRNU resulted in poorer CSS and IVRFS than ORNU.



This work was supported in part by Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan (#10649875). The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.


There are no conflicts of interest.

Supplementary material

10434_2019_7623_MOESM1_ESM.xls (37 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (XLS 37 kb)


  1. 1.
    Roupret M, Babjuk M, Comperat E, et al. European Association of Urology guidelines on upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: 2017 update. Eur Urol. 2018;73:111–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR, Figenshau RS, Chandhoke PS, Albala DM. Laparoscopic nephroureterectomy: initial clinical case report. J Laparoendosc Surg. 1991;1:343–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hanna N, Sun M, Trinh QD, et al. Propensity-score-matched comparison of perioperative outcomes between open and laparoscopic nephroureterectomy: a national series. Eur Urol. 2012;61:715–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ni S, Tao W, Chen Q, et al. Laparoscopic versus open nephroureterectomy for the treatment of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol. 2012;61:1142–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Simone G, Papalia R, Guaglianone S, et al. Laparoscopic versus open nephroureterectomy: perioperative and oncologic outcomes from a randomised prospective study. Eur Urol. 2009;56:520–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Miyazaki J, Nishiyama H, Fujimoto H, et al. Laparoscopic versus open nephroureterectomy in muscle-invasive upper tract urothelial carcinoma: subanalysis of the Multi-Institutional National Database of the Japanese Urological Association. J Endourol. 2016;30:520–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fang Z, Li L, Wang X, et al. Total retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephroureterectomy with bladder-cuff resection for upper urinary tract transitional cell carcinoma. J Investig Surg. 2014;27:354–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ito A, Shintaku I, Satoh M, et al. Prospective randomized phase II trial of a single early intravesical instillation of pirarubicin (THP) in the prevention of bladder recurrence after nephroureterectomy for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: the THP Monotherapy Study Group Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:1422–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cowan NC, Turney BW, Taylor NJ, McCarthy CL, Crew JP. Multidetector computed tomography urography for diagnosing upper urinary tract urothelial tumour. BJU Int. 2007;99:1363–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Soukup V, Capoun O, Cohen D, et al. Prognostic performance and reproducibility of the 1973 and 2004/2016 World Health Organization grading classification systems in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a European Association of Urology non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer guidelines panel systematic review. Eur Urol. 2017;72:801–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kikuchi E, Margulis V, Karakiewicz PI, et al. Lymphovascular invasion predicts clinical outcomes in patients with node-negative upper tract urothelial carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:612–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    D’Agostino RB Jr. Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med. 1998;17:2265–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kim HS, Ku JH, Jeong CW, Kwak C, Kim HH. Laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy is associated with worse survival outcomes than open radical nephroureterectomy in patients with locally advanced upper tract urothelial carcinoma. World J Urol. 2016;34:859–69.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Peyronnet B, Seisen T, Dominguez-Escrig JL, et al. Oncological outcomes of laparoscopic nephroureterectomy versus open radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a European Association of Urology guidelines systematic review. Eur Urol Focus. 2019;5:205–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nison L, Bozzini G, Roupret M, Traxer O, Colin P. Clinical, ureteroscopic, and photodynamic diagnosis of urothelial carcinomas of the upper tract: state-of-the art review for the yearly scientific report of the French National Association of Urology. Prog Urol. 2014;24:977–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Soria F, Shariat SF, Lerner SP, et al. Epidemiology, diagnosis, preoperative evaluation, and prognostic assessment of upper-tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). World J Urol. 2017;35:379–87.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Emamekhoo H, Dhillon P, Gopalakrishnan D, et al. Prognostic factors and risk stratification in invasive upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2018;16:e751–60. Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rassweiler J, Tsivian A, Kumar AV, et al. Oncological safety of laparoscopic surgery for urological malignancy: experience with more than 1000 operations. J Urol. 2003;169:2072–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ehdaie B, Chromecki TF, Lee RK, et al. Obesity adversely impacts disease specific outcomes in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma. J Urol. 2011;186:66–72.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Seisen T, Shariat SF, Cussenot O, et al. Contemporary role of lymph node dissection at the time of radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma. World J Urol. 2017;35:535–48.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ito Y, Kikuchi E, Tanaka N, et al. Preoperative hydronephrosis grade independently predicts worse pathological outcomes in patients undergoing nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma. J Urol. 2011;185:1621–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hurel S, Roupret M, Seisen T, et al. Influence of preoperative factors on the oncologic outcome for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma after radical nephroureterectomy. World J Urol. 2015;33:335–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Clements T, Messer JC, Terrell JD, et al. High-grade ureteroscopic biopsy is associated with advanced pathology of upper-tract urothelial carcinoma tumors at definitive surgical resection. J Endourol. 2012;26:398–402.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Seisen T, Granger B, Colin P, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinicopathologic factors linked to intravesical recurrence after radical nephroureterectomy to treat upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Eur Urol. 2015;67:1122–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shigeta K, Kikuchi E, Hagiwara M, et al. The conditional survival with time of intravesical recurrence of upper tract urothelial carcinoma. J Urol. 2017;198:1278–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Keisuke Shigeta
    • 1
  • Eiji Kikuchi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Takayuki Abe
    • 2
  • Masayuki Hagiwara
    • 3
  • Koichiro Ogihara
    • 1
  • Tadanori Anno
    • 1
    • 4
    • 5
  • Kota Umeda
    • 6
  • Yuto Baba
    • 7
  • Tansei Sanjo
    • 8
  • Kazunori Shojo
    • 9
  • Ryuichi Mizuno
    • 1
  • Mototsugu Oya
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of UrologyKeio University School of MedicineTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Biostatistics Unit at the Clinical Translational Research CenterKeio University School of MedicineTokyoJapan
  3. 3.Department of Urology, Tokyo Dental CollegeIchikawa General HospitalChibaJapan
  4. 4.Department of UrologySaitama City HospitalSaitamaJapan
  5. 5.Department of UrologySaitama Medical HospitalSaitamaJapan
  6. 6.Department of UrologyKawasaki Municipal HospitalKanagawaJapan
  7. 7.Department of UrologyInternational University of Health and Welfare Mita HospitalTokyoJapan
  8. 8.Department of UrologyIsehara Kyodo HospitalKanagawaJapan
  9. 9.Department of UrologyNational Hospital Organization Saitama National HospitalSaitamaJapan

Personalised recommendations