Comparison of perioperative efficacy and indications between laparoscopic capsule-preserving resection and partial nephrectomy for renal angiomyolipoma: a decade-long retrospective study
- PMID: 40259321
- PMCID: PMC12012939
- DOI: 10.1186/s12957-025-03764-8
Comparison of perioperative efficacy and indications between laparoscopic capsule-preserving resection and partial nephrectomy for renal angiomyolipoma: a decade-long retrospective study
Abstract
Background: This study aims to compare and evaluate the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic capsule-preserving resection (LCPR) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) in the treatment of renal angiomyolipoma (RAML). Multivariate regression analysis was employed to identify patient characteristics that are most suited for LCPR.
Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 209 patients diagnosed with RAML and treated surgically at our hospital between January 2010 and December 2023. The patients were divided into two groups: 102 in the LCPR group and 109 in the LPN group. Preoperative factors (e.g., age, sex, glomerular filtration rate (GFR), and tumor location), intraoperative factors (e.g., ischemia time and blood loss), and postoperative outcomes (e.g., extubation time, hospitalization duration, and renal function) were recorded. Chi-square tests, independent sample t-tests, and rank-sum tests were applied where appropriate. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify patient characteristics associated with suitability for LCPR.
Results: No significant differences were observed in the preoperative baseline characteristics (age, sex, or tumor size) between the two groups (P > 0.05). All surgeries in the LCPR group were successfully completed, and no patients required conversion to open surgery. The average operation time was 118.56 ± 44.49 min, the warm ischemia time was 17.40 ± 7.51 min, and the intraoperative blood loss was 197.35 ± 282.64 ml, all of which were significantly lower than in the LPN group (P < 0.05). The incidence of postoperative complications in the LCPR group was 21.6% for Clavien-Dindo grade I and 2.9% for higher-grade complications, significantly lower than the LPN group (33.6% and 8.4%, respectively; P = 0.02). The average postoperative hospital stay in the LCPR group was 6.42 ± 3.01 days, significantly shorter than in the LPN group (9.27 ± 3.24 days; P < 0.001). The average GFR 1-3 days after surgery and the renal function grade 3 months post-surgery were significantly better in the LCPR group compared to the LPN group (P = 0.001). Multivariate regression analysis identified that patients with low preoperative serum creatinine levels, mild clinical symptoms, tumors smaller than 6 cm, and tumors located near the middle of the kidney were more likely to undergo LCPR (P < 0.05). These patients also experienced less renal function deterioration post-surgery.
Conclusions: Laparoscopic capsule-preserving tumor resection offers significant clinical advantages in treating renal angiomyolipoma. Compared to traditional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy, LCPR results in less intraoperative blood loss, shorter warm ischemia times, lower complication rates, and faster postoperative recovery. Patients with mild clinical symptoms, small tumors, or tumors located in complex regions such as the renal hilum are more suitable for this surgical approach, making it a promising technique for broader clinical application.
Keywords: Laparoscopic capsule-preserving resection; Multivariate regression analysis; Renal angiomyolipoma; Retrospective study.
© 2025. The Author(s).
Conflict of interest statement
Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: The study was approved by the Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital Committee (approval number: SHSY-IEC-5.0/22K80/P01), and the need for informed consent was waived by the board. Consent for publication: Consent to publish: Not applicable. All patients enrolled in this study obtained informed consent and signed a consent form for surgery before surgery. At the same time, in accordance with the principle of confidentiality, no identifiable patient personal privacy information appears in the article. If necessary, it can be obtained from the corresponding author under reasonable request. All authors of the manuscript have read and agreed to the content of the manuscript and are responsible for all aspects of the accuracy and completeness of the manuscript according to ICMJE standards. This article is original, has not been published in a journal, and is not currently being considered by other journals. We agree to the terms of the BioMed Central Copyright and License Agreement and (if applicable) the Open Data Policy. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.
Figures

Similar articles
-
Perioperative and renal functional outcomes of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) for renal tumours of high surgical complexity: a single-institute comparison between clampless and clamped procedures.World J Urol. 2017 Mar;35(3):403-409. doi: 10.1007/s00345-016-1882-7. Epub 2016 Jun 20. World J Urol. 2017. PMID: 27324881
-
Comparison of Partial and Radical Laparascopic Nephrectomy: Perioperative and Oncologic Outcomes for Clinical T2 Renal Cell Carcinoma.J Endourol. 2018 Oct;32(10):950-954. doi: 10.1089/end.2018.0199. Epub 2018 Sep 5. J Endourol. 2018. PMID: 30039718
-
Retroperitoneal Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy Versus Radical Nephrectomy for Clinical T1 Renal Hilar Tumor: Comparison of Perioperative Characteristics and Short-Term Functional and Oncologic Outcomes.J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2018 Oct;28(10):1183-1187. doi: 10.1089/lap.2018.0064. Epub 2018 Apr 18. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2018. PMID: 29668402
-
Initial experience in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal tumor with clamping of renal vessels.J Endourol. 2003 Aug;17(6):373-8. doi: 10.1089/089277903767923146. J Endourol. 2003. PMID: 12965062 Clinical Trial.
-
Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy without clamping the renal pedicle.Surg Endosc. 2020 Jul;34(7):3027-3036. doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-07099-w. Epub 2019 Aug 28. Surg Endosc. 2020. PMID: 31463724
References
-
- Bissler JJ, Kingswood JC. Renal angiomyolipomata. Kidney Int. 2004;66:924–34. - PubMed
-
- Flum AS, Hamoui N, Said MA, et al. Update on the Diagnosis and Management of Renal Angiomyolipoma. J Urol. 2016;195:834–46. - PubMed
-
- Lam HC, Siroky BJ, Henske EP. Renal disease in tuberous sclerosis complex: pathogenesis and therapy. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2018;14:704–16. - PubMed
-
- Brakemeier S, Bachmann F, Budde K. Treatment of renal angiomyolipoma in tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) patients. Pediatr Nephrol. 2017;32:1137–44. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical