Literature DB >> 21168170

Treatment of patients with small renal masses: a survey of the American Urological Association.

Rodney H Breau1, Paul L Crispen, Sarah M Jenkins, Michael L Blute, Bradley C Leibovich.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We surveyed American Urological Association members to determine factors that influence the treatment of patients with small renal masses.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In June 2009 American Urological Association members were solicited to complete an online survey. Respondents were asked their preferred treatment for 8 cases and 3 index patients. In each case computerized tomographic axial and schematic coronal images were provided.
RESULTS: A total of 759 active urologists with varied training backgrounds and clinical practice settings completed the survey. Tumor size (OR 8.4, 95% CI 7.1-10.1), tumor depth (OR 19.2, 95% CI 14.8-25.0) and tumor location (OR 24.0, 95% CI 18.1-31.8) were markedly associated with preference for radical nephrectomy instead of partial nephrectomy. Fellowship trained urologists (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.6) and urologists at academic hospitals (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.4-0.9) were less likely to choose radical nephrectomy. Respondents were more likely to choose active surveillance in an older patient (OR 2.7, 95% CI 2.1-3.6) or in a patient with comorbidities (OR 10.0, 95% CI 8.0-12.4). Urologists were less likely to choose active surveillance for a 4 vs 2 cm tumor (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.15-0.21). Active surveillance was chosen more often if the tumor was perihilar vs mid kidney (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.8-2.3) or polar (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.9-2.5).
CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable heterogeneity in the treatment of patients with clinical T1a tumors. Several factors explain these differences as selected treatments are independently associated with tumor, patient and urologist factors. Copyright Â
© 2011 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21168170     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.09.092

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


  18 in total

1.  Patterns of care for renal surgery: Underutilization of nephron-sparing procedures.

Authors:  Jessica Hammett; Joan Ko; Nora Byrd; Paul L Crispen; Tracey L Krupski
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013-06-12       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  Surgeon-specific factors affecting treatment decisions among Canadian urologists in the management of pT1a renal tumours.

Authors:  Alexandra Leora Millman; Kenneth T Pace; Michael Ordon; Jason Young Lee
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 3.  Open partial nephrectomy: ancient art or currently available technique?

Authors:  Mauro Seveso; Fabio Grizzi; Giorgio Bozzini; Alberto Mandressi; Giorgio Guazzoni; Gianluigi Taverna
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2015-10-05       Impact factor: 2.370

4.  Urinary aquaporin 1 and perilipin 2: Can these novel markers accurately characterize small renal masses and help guide patient management?

Authors:  Joseph B Song; Jeremiah J Morrissey; Jonathan M Mobley; Karen G Figenshau; Joel M Vetter; Sam B Bhayani; Evan D Kharasch; Robert Sherburne Figenshau
Journal:  Int J Urol       Date:  2018-11-22       Impact factor: 3.369

5.  Understanding criteria for surveillance of patients with a small renal mass.

Authors:  Bruce L Jacobs; Hung-Jui Tan; Jeffrey S Montgomery; Alon Z Weizer; David P Wood; David C Miller; J Stuart Wolf; Khaled S Hafez
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 2.649

6.  Active surveillance for incidental renal mass in the octogenarian.

Authors:  Kenan E Celtik; Paras H Shah; Vinay R Patel; Daniel M Moreira; Arvin K George; Valerio Iacovelli; Manaf Alom; Andrew Ng; Amin Herati; Simpa S Salami; Hannah Bierwiler; Michael J Schwartz; Lee Richstone; Joph Steckel; Manish A Vira; Louis R Kavoussi
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-11-01       Impact factor: 4.226

7.  Provider-based research networks and diffusion of surgical technologies among patients with early-stage kidney cancer.

Authors:  Hung-Jui Tan; Anne-Marie Meyer; Tzy-Mey Kuo; Angela B Smith; Stephanie B Wheeler; William R Carpenter; Matthew E Nielsen
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2014-11-19       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Surgical management of stage T1 renal tumours at Canadian academic centres.

Authors:  Luke T Lavallée; Simon Tanguay; Michael A Jewett; Lori Wood; Anil Kapoor; Ricardo A Rendon; Ronald B Moore; Louis Lacombe; Jun Kawakami; Stephen E Pautler; Darrel E Drachenberg; Peter C Black; Jean-Baptiste Lattouf; Christopher Morash; Ilias Cagiannos; Zhihui Liu; Rodney H Breau
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2015 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.862

9.  Diagnostic performance of prospectively assigned clear cell Likelihood scores (ccLS) in small renal masses at multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Brett A Johnson; Sandy Kim; Ryan L Steinberg; Alberto Diaz de Leon; Ivan Pedrosa; Jeffrey A Cadeddu
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2019-09-17       Impact factor: 3.498

10.  Patients with anatomically "simple" renal masses are more likely to be placed on active surveillance than those with anatomically "complex" lesions.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Tomaszewski; Robert G Uzzo; Neil Kocher; Tianyu Li; Brandon Manley; Reza Mehrazin; Timothy Ito; Philip Abbosh; Rosalia Viterbo; David Y T Chen; Richard E Greenberg; Daniel Canter; Marc C Smaldone; Alexander Kutikov
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2014-06-07       Impact factor: 3.498

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.