Literature DB >> 16890647

Are small renal tumors harmless? Analysis of histopathological features according to tumors 4 cm or less in diameter.

Mesut Remzi1, Mehmet Ozsoy, Hans-Christoph Klingler, Martin Susani, Matthias Waldert, Christian Seitz, Joerg Schmidbauer, Michael Marberger.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Small renal tumors detected incidentally are considered to have less aggressive potential. This assumption is mainly based on the low tendency to increase in size on serial imaging studies, but histopathological parameters of progression in larger patient series are scant.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed data of 287 tumor bearing kidneys in which solid tumors 4 cm or less in diameter were detected by cross-sectional imaging and subsequently removed surgically. Tumor size as documented by preoperative computerized tomography was correlated to histological diagnosis, and in cases of malignancy correlated to tumor type, pathological TNM stage and nuclear (Fuhrman) grade. With multifocal lesions the largest single tumor was considered the reference lesion but multifocality was also considered a separate parameter.
RESULTS: At a mean tumor diameter of 2.94 +/- 0.87 cm 65 (22.6%) tumors were 2 cm or less, 103 (35.9%) were 2.1 to 3.0 cm and 119 (41.5%) were 3.1 to 4 cm in diameter. A total of 56 (19.5%) tumors were benign with no correlation to tumor size (Pearson test p = 0.660). Renal cell cancer was found in 227 (79.1%) patients with 159 (70.0%) clear cell, 47 (20.7%) papillary, 11 (4.8%) chromophobe and 10 others with no correlation to tumor diameter. Of the kidneys 31 (13.6%) had multifocal renal cell carcinoma, with a significant correlation to larger tumor diameter (linear regression p = 0.048) and papillary renal cell carcinoma subtype (linear regression p = 0.018). Two (4.2%), 4 (5%) and 25 (25.5%) cases of renal cell carcinoma 2 cm or less, 2.1 to 3 cm and 3.1 to 4 cm in diameter had Fuhrman grade G3/4, respectively (Pearson p = 0.0007). Advanced stage (pT3a or greater) was documented in 2 (4.2%), 12 (14.9%) and 35 (35.7%) cases for the same categories, respectively (p = 0.0023). Whereas distant metastases were diagnosed in only 4 patients with renal cell carcinoma with tumors 3 cm or less, distant metastases were in 10 (8.4%) patients with tumors 3.1 to 4 cm (p = 0.045).
CONCLUSIONS: The aggressive potential of small renal cell carcinoma increases dramatically beyond a tumor diameter of 3 cm. Given the difficulty in measuring tumor diameters reliably with sequential imaging studies, the threshold for selecting patients for a surveillance strategy should be set well under this parameter.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16890647     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.04.047

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  79 in total

1.  MRI evaluation of small (<4cm) solid renal masses: multivariate modeling improves diagnostic accuracy for angiomyolipoma without visible fat compared to univariate analysis.

Authors:  Nicola Schieda; Marc Dilauro; Bardia Moosavi; Taryn Hodgdon; Gregory O Cron; Matthew D F McInnes; Trevor A Flood
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 2.  Management of small renal masses: a review.

Authors:  Mesut Remzi; Elchin Javadli; Mehmet Ozsoy
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2010-02-23       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  [Renal cell carcinoma--developments in therapy].

Authors:  M Marberger; G Janetschek
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 0.639

4.  Diagnostic accuracy of segmental enhancement inversion for the diagnosis of renal oncocytoma using biphasic computed tomography (CT) and multiphase contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Authors:  Nicola Schieda; Maali Al-Subhi; Trevor A Flood; Mohammed El-Khodary; Matthew D F McInnes
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Response by authors re: Differentiation of oncocytoma and renal cell carcinoma in small renal masses (<4 cm): the role of 4-phase computerized tomography.

Authors:  V G Bird; P Kanagarajah; G Morillo; D J Caruso; R Ayyathurai; R Leveillee; M Jorda
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2011-05-05       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  Angiomyolipoma (AML) without visible fat: Ultrasound, CT and MR imaging features with pathological correlation.

Authors:  Shaheed W Hakim; Nicola Schieda; Taryn Hodgdon; Matthew D F McInnes; Marc Dilauro; Trevor A Flood
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-06-03       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 7.  [Minimally invasive vs. open surgical procedures in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma].

Authors:  J W Thüroff; F Roos
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 0.639

8.  Is anatomic complexity associated with renal tumor growth kinetics under active surveillance?

Authors:  Reza Mehrazin; Marc C Smaldone; Brian Egleston; Jeffrey J Tomaszewski; Charles W Concodora; Timothy K Ito; Philip H Abbosh; David Y T Chen; Alexander Kutikov; Robert G Uzzo
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2015-03-14       Impact factor: 3.498

Review 9.  Imaging of Solid Renal Masses.

Authors:  Fernando U Kay; Ivan Pedrosa
Journal:  Urol Clin North Am       Date:  2018-06-15       Impact factor: 2.241

Review 10.  [Active surveillance: concept for renal cell carcinoma?].

Authors:  I Tsaur; D Schilling; A Haferkamp
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 0.639

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.