Background and aims:

Nephron-sparing surgery has become the standard surgical technique for small renal masses, taking the place of traditional radical nephrectomy. The aim of the present study was to compare partial nephrectomy and tumor enucleation, with respect to morbidity and oncologic results.

Materials and methods:

A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients that underwent partial nephrectomy or enucleation at the Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa de Zaragoza, between August 2011 and October 2019. Demographics, clinical and surgical characteristics, and oncologic results were the variables analyzed.

Results:

Forty-eight patients were followed for 36,1±28,0 months. Compared with the partial nephrectomy group, the patients that underwent tumor enucleation presented with lower values of mean blood loss (117,7±95.1 ml and 221±293.1 ml, p=0,488), ischemia (46% and 95%, p<0,001), mean ischemia time (24,6±7,2 min and 25,1±10,4 min, p=0,844), and complications (11,5% and 22,7%, p=0,442), respectively. No local recurrence was observed.

Conclusions:

Both groups were comparable in relation to tumor stage. The enucleation group presented with less blood loss, less need for vascular clamping, and similar ischemia time, compared with the partial nephrectomy group. Both techniques were oncologically safe, with a low rate of compromised surgical margins. Postoperative morbidity with the two techniques was low.