Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2023 Dec;47(10):621-630.
doi: 10.1016/j.acuroe.2023.04.006. Epub 2023 Apr 24.

How to manage renal masses in kidney transplant recipients? A collaborative review by the EAU-YAU kidney transplantation and renal cancer working groups

[Article in English, Spanish]
I Andras  1 , A Pecoraro  2 , T Telecan  3 , A Piana  4 , R Boissier  5 , V Hevia  6 , T Prudhomme  7 , D Amparore  8 , R Bertolo  9 , U Carbonara  10 , S Erdem  11 , P Diana  12 , A Ingels  13 , O Kara  14 , L Marandino  15 , M Marchioni  16 , S Muselaers  17 , N Pavan  18 , A Pecoraro  8 , E Roussel  19 , N Crisan  3 , A Territo  20 , R Campi  21 ; en nombre del Grupo de Trasplante Renal y Cáncer Renal de la sección de Jóvenes Urólogos Académicos (YAU)
Affiliations
Review

How to manage renal masses in kidney transplant recipients? A collaborative review by the EAU-YAU kidney transplantation and renal cancer working groups

[Article in English, Spanish]
I Andras et al. Actas Urol Esp (Engl Ed). 2023 Dec.

Abstract

Introduction: Kidney transplant (KT) recipients have a four-times higher risk of renal malignancies compared to general population. As these patients frequently harbor bilateral or multifocal tumors, the management of renal masses is still under debate.

Objective: To explore the current management of the native kidney masses in KT patients.

Acquisition of evidence: We performed a literature search on MEDLINE/PubMed database. A number of 34 studies were included in the present review.

Synthesis of evidence: In frail patients with renal masses below 3 cm, active surveillance is a feasible alternative. Nephron-sparing surgery is not justified for masses in the native kidney. Radical nephrectomy is the standard treatment for post-transplant renal tumors of the native kidneys in KT recipients, with laparoscopic techniques leading to significantly less perioperative complication rates as compared to the open approach. Concurrent bilateral native nephrectomy at the time of transplantation can be considered in patients with renal mass and polycystic kidney disease, especially if no residual urinary output is present. Patients with localized disease and successful radical nephrectomy do not require immunosuppression adjustment. In metastatic cases, mTOR agents can ensure efficient antitumoral response, while maintaining proper immunosuppression in order to protect the graft.

Conclusions: Post-transplant renal cancer of the native kidneys is a frequent occurrence. Radical nephrectomy is most frequently performed for localized renal masses. A standardized and widely-approved screening strategy for malignancies of native renal units is yet to be implemented.

Keywords: Carcinoma de células renales; Native kidney; Nefrectomía radical; Radical nephrectomy; Renal cell carcinoma; Renal transplant; Riñón nativo; Systemic therapy; Terapia sistémica; Trasplante renal.

PubMed Disclaimer