OBJECTIVE: To identify whether RENAL nephrometry score is associated with partial nephrectomy (PN) technique. RENAL nephrometry score quantifies anatomic characteristics of renal tumors. Data are limited regarding clinical utility for surgical planning. METHODS: Multicenter analysis of patients undergoing PN for renal masses from March 2003 to May 2011. Cohort was stratified by surgical modality: open partial nephrectomy (OPN), laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN), and robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (RALPN). Demographic and clinicopathological variables were compared between groups; RENAL score was calculated from preoperative imaging. Factors associated with choice of treatment modality and urine leak were entered into multivariable models. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-three patients who underwent OPN, 100 patients who underwent LPN, and 31 patients who underwent RALPN were evaluated, the median tumor size (cm) was significantly larger for OPN (OPN 4.2 vs LPN 2.4 vs RALPN 2.0; P < .001); median operative time (minutes) and ischemia time (minutes) were shorter in OPN (OPN 190 and 25 vs LPN 200 and 29 vs RALPN 195 and 30; P = .042 and P < .001). Mean RENAL score was highest in OPN (OPN 8 vs LPN 6.3 vs RALPN 6.4; P < .001). No significant differences were noted in overall/high-grade complication rates (Clavien, P = .441/.985). On multivariate analysis, there was a 55% increased odds of undergoing OPN for each increase in RENAL score (P < .001). Higher RENAL score was associated with increased odds of urine leak (odds ratios [OR], 1.56; P = .002). CONCLUSION: RENAL nephrometry score was associated with type of surgical approach (open vs laparoscopic/robotic) and urine leak. RENAL score may be useful as a decision-making tool in evaluation of patients for nephron-sparing surgery (NSS). Further investigation is requisite.
OBJECTIVE: To identify whether RENAL nephrometry score is associated with partial nephrectomy (PN) technique. RENAL nephrometry score quantifies anatomic characteristics of renal tumors. Data are limited regarding clinical utility for surgical planning. METHODS: Multicenter analysis of patients undergoing PN for renal masses from March 2003 to May 2011. Cohort was stratified by surgical modality: open partial nephrectomy (OPN), laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN), and robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (RALPN). Demographic and clinicopathological variables were compared between groups; RENAL score was calculated from preoperative imaging. Factors associated with choice of treatment modality and urine leak were entered into multivariable models. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-three patients who underwent OPN, 100 patients who underwent LPN, and 31 patients who underwent RALPN were evaluated, the median tumor size (cm) was significantly larger for OPN (OPN 4.2 vs LPN 2.4 vs RALPN 2.0; P < .001); median operative time (minutes) and ischemia time (minutes) were shorter in OPN (OPN 190 and 25 vs LPN 200 and 29 vs RALPN 195 and 30; P = .042 and P < .001). Mean RENAL score was highest in OPN (OPN 8 vs LPN 6.3 vs RALPN 6.4; P < .001). No significant differences were noted in overall/high-grade complication rates (Clavien, P = .441/.985). On multivariate analysis, there was a 55% increased odds of undergoing OPN for each increase in RENAL score (P < .001). Higher RENAL score was associated with increased odds of urine leak (odds ratios [OR], 1.56; P = .002). CONCLUSION: RENAL nephrometry score was associated with type of surgical approach (open vs laparoscopic/robotic) and urine leak. RENAL score may be useful as a decision-making tool in evaluation of patients for nephron-sparing surgery (NSS). Further investigation is requisite.
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: 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: Alp Tuna Beksac; Gerant Rivera-Sanfeliz; Catherine A Dufour; Unwanaobong Nseyo; Zachary Hamilton; Sean W Berquist; Abd-elRahman Hassan; Omer A Raheem; Song Wang; Robert W Wake; Robert E Gold; Ithaar H Derweesh Journal: World J Urol Date: 2016-08-02 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Sean P Stroup; Zachary A Hamilton; Michael T Marshall; Hak J Lee; Sean W Berquist; Abd-Elrahman S Hassan; Alp T Beksac; Charles A Field; Aaron Bloch; Fang Wan; Michelle L McDonald; Nishant D Patel; James O L'Esperance; Ithaar H Derweesh Journal: World J Urol Date: 2017-06-27 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Ravi M Kumar; Luke T Lavallée; Darren Desantis; Sonya Cnossen; Ranjeeta Mallick; Ilias Cagiannos; Chris Morash; Rodney H Breau Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2017-06 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Darren Desantis; Luke T Lavallée; Kelsey Witiuk; Ranjeeta Mallick; Fadi Kamal; Dean Fergusson; Christopher Morash; Ilias Cagiannos; Rodney H Breau Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2015 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Tobias Klatte; Vincenzo Ficarra; Christian Gratzke; Jihad Kaouk; Alexander Kutikov; Veronica Macchi; Alexandre Mottrie; Francesco Porpiglia; James Porter; Craig G Rogers; Paul Russo; R Houston Thompson; Robert G Uzzo; Christopher G Wood; Inderbir S Gill Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2015-04-22 Impact factor: 20.096