OBJECTIVE: To determine the reliability of the RENAL nephrometry scoring system by studying its reproducibility among different observers. METHODS: We reviewed computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging scans from 51 patients who underwent partial nephrectomy at our cancer center. Digitized axial and coronal images were available for all patients. Three surgeons independently scored the renal tumors using the RENAL nephrometry system. The scoring system had 5 components: R (tumor diameter), E (exophytic/endophytic), N (nearness to collecting system), A (anterior/posterior), and L (location in relation to polar lines). Interobserver variability was calculated for each of the 5 components using a frequency procedure and Kappa statistics. RESULTS: The reliability assessed by frequency procedure showed concordance among 3 observers in 94%, 76%, 66%, 80%, and 54% for the R, E, N, A, and L components, respectively. The corresponding kappa values for each of these 5 components were 0.95, 0.86, 0.76, 0.84, and 0.73, respectively. CONCLUSION: The RENAL nephrometry scoring system has good interobserver reliability. Quantifying the tumor location (L) was more challenging and the least reliable of the 5 components. This variation might affect the total nephrometry score and should be considered when using the system to compare different series of patients undergoing partial nephrectomy.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the reliability of the RENAL nephrometry scoring system by studying its reproducibility among different observers. METHODS: We reviewed computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging scans from 51 patients who underwent partial nephrectomy at our cancer center. Digitized axial and coronal images were available for all patients. Three surgeons independently scored the renal tumors using the RENAL nephrometry system. The scoring system had 5 components: R (tumor diameter), E (exophytic/endophytic), N (nearness to collecting system), A (anterior/posterior), and L (location in relation to polar lines). Interobserver variability was calculated for each of the 5 components using a frequency procedure and Kappa statistics. RESULTS: The reliability assessed by frequency procedure showed concordance among 3 observers in 94%, 76%, 66%, 80%, and 54% for the R, E, N, A, and L components, respectively. The corresponding kappa values for each of these 5 components were 0.95, 0.86, 0.76, 0.84, and 0.73, respectively. CONCLUSION: The RENAL nephrometry scoring system has good interobserver reliability. Quantifying the tumor location (L) was more challenging and the least reliable of the 5 components. This variation might affect the total nephrometry score and should be considered when using the system to compare different series of patients undergoing partial nephrectomy.
Authors: Zhuo-Wei Liu; Ephrem O Olweny; Gang Yin; Stephen Faddegon; Yung K Tan; Woong Kyu Han; Jeffrey A Cadeddu Journal: World J Urol Date: 2012-04-28 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Wassim M Bazzi; Daniel D Sjoberg; Angelica A C Grasso; Melanie Bernstein; Raul Parra; Jonathan A Coleman Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2015-07-09 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: Massimiliano Spaliviero; Bing Ying Poon; Christoph A Karlo; Giuliano B Guglielmetti; Pier Luigi Di Paolo; Renato Beluco Corradi; Alexandre G Martin-Malburet; Felix Campos-Juanatey; Eva Escudero-Fontano; Daniel D Sjoberg; Paul Russo; Jonathan A Coleman; Oguz Akin; Karim A Touijer Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2015-08-20 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Massimiliano Spaliviero; Bing Ying Poon; Omer Aras; Pier Luigi Di Paolo; Giuliano B Guglielmetti; Christian Z Coleman; Christoph A Karlo; Melanie L Bernstein; Daniel D Sjoberg; Paul Russo; Karim A Touijer; Oguz Akin; Jonathan A Coleman Journal: World J Urol Date: 2014-08-24 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Aaron M Potretzke; Theodora A Potretzke; B Alexander Knight; Joel Vetter; Alyssa M Park; Grecori Anderson; Sam B Bhayani; R Sherburne Figenshau Journal: World J Urol Date: 2016-03-21 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: U D Reddy; R Pillai; R A Parker; J Weston; N A Burgess; E T S Ho; R D Mills; M A Rochester Journal: Ann R Coll Surg Engl Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 1.891