Morbidity of elective surgery for localized renal masses among elderly patients: A contemporary multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: The aging population and the incidence of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are increasing worldwide. Over 25% of newly diagnosed LRM (localized renal masses) occur in patients over the eighth decade of life. The decision-making and treatment approach to LRM in this population represents a clinical dilemma due to inherited decreased functional reserve and competing mortality risks. Current literature reports conflicting evidence regarding age as a risk factor for worst surgical outcomes. As such, we aimed to evaluate the contemporary morbidity of elective surgery for LRM among elderly patients, focusing on intraoperative and postoperative complications.

METHODS: After Ethical Committee approval, we queried our prospectively maintained databases to identify patients with preoperative eGFR ≥60 ml/min/1.73 m [(David and Bloom, 2022) 22 and a normal contralateral kidney who underwent partial or radical nephrectomy (PN or RN) for a single cT1-T2N0M0 LRM between 1/2015-12/2021 at four high-volume European Academic Institutions. Patients were categorized by age groups: <50 yrs (young) vs. 50-75 (middle-aged) yrs vs.> 75 yrs (elderly). Postoperative complications were recorded according to Clavien-Dindo (CD) classification. The primary objectives were the proportion of patients experiencing intraoperative (IOC), any grade (AGC), and high-grade postoperative complications (HGC), defined as CD grade 3-5.

RESULTS: Overall, 2469/3076 (80.2%) patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 363 (14.7%) were young, 1682 (68.1%) were middle-aged, and 424 (17.2%) were elderly. Compared to middle-aged and young patients, elderly patients had a higher median Charlson Comorbidity Index (6 vs. 4 vs. 0, p < 0.01) and a higher proportion of cT1 renal mass (87.6% vs. 93.0% vs. 93.6%, p < 0.01). No differences among the study groups were found regarding surgical approach (open vs. minimally-invasive) and type of surgery (PN vs. RN). We found that older patients experienced similar IOC (4.5% vs. 4.2% vs. 3.3%, p = 0.7) and AGC (23.1% vs. 20.0% vs. 21.5%, p = 0.4) compared to middle-aged and young patients, respectively. Similarly, there were no significant differences in HGC between the study cohorts (0.7% vs. 1.4% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.8). At multivariable analysis, open approach and PN significantly predicted the occurrence of AGCs, while only the open surgical approach was associated with the occurrence of HGCs.

CONCLUSION: In kidney cancer tertiary referral centers, the risk of IOC and postoperative HGC after PN or RN for localized renal masses (LRM) is low, despite a non-negligible risk of AGC, especially in elderly patients. Further efforts should focus on identifying multidisciplinary strategies to select patients most likely to benefit from surgery among elderly candidates with LRMs and decrease the morbidity of surgery in this specific setting.