This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1538574408320525v1 42/4/335    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Wang, G. J. Articles by Woo, E. Y. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Wang, G. J. Articles by Woo, E. Y. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Single-Center Experience of Caval Thrombectomy in Patients With Renal Cell Carcinoma With Tumor Thrombus Extension Into the Inferior Vena Cava

Hospital of University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, grace.wang@uphs. upenn.edu

Jeffrey P. Carpenter, MD

Hospital of University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Ronald M. Fairman, MD

Hospital of University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Benjamin M. Jackson, MD

Hospital of University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Bruce Malkowicz, MD

Hospital of University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Keith N. Van Arsdalen, MD

Hospital of University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Edward Y. Woo, MD

Hospital of University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

The objective of this study is to describe a single-center experience of caval thrombectomy in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and tumor thrombus extension into the inferior vena cava (IVC). We retrospectively reviewed 23 patients undergoing radical nephrectomy with caval thrombectomy. Follow-up included an office visit and computed tomography scan. Statistical comparisons were made using 2-sample t tests. Patients' ages ranged from 32 to 83 years (mean, 62 years; 18 male, 5 female). Tumor size ranged from 3 to 21 cm (mean, 8.6 cm). Tumor thrombus staging was based on the Nevus classification: level I (2/23), II (6/23), III (13/26), IV (2/23). Tumor thrombi were removed by means of digital extraction (20), Fogarty embolectomy (2), or endarterectomy (1-caval wall invasion). Lateral venorrhaphy was used for IVC repair in all cases. Hepatic mobilization and suprahepatic clamping were necessary in 14 patients. Clamp times were significantly different between the suprahepatic (SH) and infrahepatic (IH) groups (15 vs 9.4 minutes, P < .012). Mean blood loss was also significantly different (3.2 L vs 2 L, P < .045). In the SH group, 2 patients developed postoperative atrial fibrillation and 2 patients died (respiratory failure; missed enterotomy). The IH group had no perioperative morbidity or mortality. Median followup was 15 months (range, 1—54 months). Follow-up imaging was available for 19/23 patients. Ninety-five percent of patients had a patent IVC (18). One SH patient developed an IVC stenosis/thrombosis 12 months postoperatively with successful thrombolysis and stenting. There was a 16% (3/19) recurrence rate in follow-up, with all patients demonstrating renal vascular invasion and high Fuhrman grade upon final pathologic evaluation. Caval thrombectomy can be performed safely during radical nephrectomy for RCC with tumor thrombus extension. The need for suprahepatic clamping is associated with longer clamp times, increased blood loss, and increased morbidity and mortality. Lateral venorrhaphy with primary repair avoids complicated caval reconstructions and results in high patency rates, despite a not insignificant recurrence rate.

Key Words: inferior vena cava • tumor thrombectomy • renal cell carcinoma

This version was published on August 1, 2008

Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Vol. 42, No. 4, 335-340 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/1538574408320525


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?