Background: The present study aimed to conduct a pooled analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive partial nephrectomy (MIPN) with open partial nephrectomy (OPN) in patients with complex renal tumors (defined as PADUA or RENAL score ≥7). Methods: The present study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/JS9/A394. We conducted a systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases until October 2022. MIPN and OPN-controlled trials for complex renal tumors were included. The primary outcomes were perioperative results, complications, renal function, and oncologic outcomes. Results: A total of 2405 patients were included in 13 studies. MIPN outperformed OPN in terms of hospital stay [weighted mean difference (WMD) −1.84 days, 95% CI −2.35 to −1.33; P<0.00001], blood loss (WMD −52.42 ml, 95% CI −71.43 to −33.41; P<0.00001), transfusion rates [odds ratio (OR) 0.34, 95% CI 0.17–0.67; P=0.002], major complications (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40–0.86; P=0.007) and overall complications (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.31–0.59; P<0.0001), while operative time, warm ischemia time, conversion to radical nephrectomy rates, estimated glomerular decline, positive surgical margins, local recurrence, overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and cancer-specific survival were not significantly different. Conclusions: The present study demonstrated that MIPN was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay, less blood loss, and fewer complications in treating complex renal tumors. MIPN may be considered a better treatment for patients with complex tumors when technically feasible.

Background: The present study aimed to conduct a pooled analysis to compare the perioperative and oncologic outcomes of minimally-invasive radical nephrectomy with tumor thrombus (MI-RNTT) with open radical nephrectomy with tumor thrombus (O-RNTT). Methods: This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Four electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library database) were systematically searched to identify relevant studies published in English up to December 2022. The primary outcomes were perioperative results, complications, and oncologic outcomes. Review Manager 5.4 was used for this analysis. Results: In total, eight retrospective trials with a total of 563 patients were included. Compared to O-RNTT, MI-RNTT had shorter hospitalization time [weighted mean difference (WMD) -3.58 days, 95% CI: −4.56 to −2.59; P<0.00001), lower volumes of blood loss (WMD -663.32 ml, 95% CI: −822.22 to −504.42; P<0.00001), fewer transfusion rates (OR 0.18, 95% CI: 0.09–0.35; P<0.00001), fewer overall complications (OR 0.33, 95% CI: 0.22–0.49; P<0.00001), and fewer major complications s (OR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.24–1.00; P=0.05). However, operative time, intraoperative complications, mortality rate (intraoperative, within 30 days, and total mortality), overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and cancer-specific survival did not significantly differ between the two groups. Conclusions: MI-RNTT possesses more benefits than O-RNTT in terms of length of hospital stay, blood loss, and complications and provides comparable mortality rates and oncologic outcomes. However, more comprehensive and rigorous research is warranted to further validate the outcomes, which should include a larger sample size and comprehensive data from high-volume medical centers.

Background: This study aimed to conduct a pooled analysis to compare the outcomes of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who received presurgical systemic therapy [(ST); including immunotherapy and/or targeted therapy] followed by cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) [(deferred CN; (dCN)] with those who underwent upfront CN (uCN) followed by ST. Methods: The present study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library database to identify eligible comparative studies up to April 2023. To evaluate their relevance, pooled hazard ratio with 95% CIs were calculated. Results: A total of 3157 patients were included in nine studies. The dCN group was observed to be correlated with superior overall survival (OS) compared to the uCN group (hazard ratio =0.71, 95% CI 0.57–0.89, P=0.003). Moreover, the authors conducted subgroup analyses according to the type of ST, sample size, sex, age, and risk score, and observed similar outcomes for OS across most subgroups. Conclusions: The results of this study demonstrated that dCN may be associated with improved OS compared to uCN in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving ST. However, no significant differences were found between the uCN and dCN groups in the immunotherapy-based combinations subgroup. Further research is needed to confirm these results.