Literature DB >> 28011276

Excised Parenchymal Mass During Partial Nephrectomy: Functional Implications.

Wen Dong1, Zhiling Zhang2, Juping Zhao3, Jitao Wu4, Chalairat Suk-Ouichai5, Diego Aguilar Palacios6, Elvis Caraballo Antonio6, Sanam Babbar6, Erick M Remer7, Jianbo Li8, Sudhir Isharwal6, Joseph Zabell6, Steven C Campbell9.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether excised parenchymal mass (EPM) during partial nephrectomy (PN) correlates with functional decline and can serve as a surrogate for functional outcomes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: All 215 patients managed with PN for unifocal renal mass with necessary studies to determine EPM and percent glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and parenchymal mass preserved (both global and specific to the operated kidney) were analyzed. EPM was estimated from the pathologic specimen by subtracting the tumor mass from the specimen mass, with both calculated using the elliptical formula. Vascularized parenchymal mass preserved was measured from computed tomography scans obtained <2 months prior and 3-12 months after surgery. All functional analyses were required to be within the same time frames, and patients with a contralateral kidney were also required to have nuclear renal scans.
RESULTS: The median tumor size was 3.5 cm and the median R.E.N.A.L. was 7. Warm and cold ischemia were utilized in 123 and 92 patients, respectively (median ischemia time = 23 minutes). The median global GFR preserved was 89%, the median total parenchymal mass preserved was 93%, and the median estimated EPM was 16 cm3. Whereas percent parenchymal mass preserved correlated strongly with global and ipsilateral GFR preserved (both P < .001), EPM failed to correlate with functional outcomes on both univariable and multivariable analyses.
CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that parenchymal mass preserved with standard PN by experienced surgeons associates strongly with function preserved, whereas EPM fails to correlate with functional outcomes. Further study of the functional impact of EPM in other circumstances will be required, such as enucleation or PN performed by less-experienced surgeons.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28011276     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2016.12.021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  4 in total

1.  Organ-sparing procedures in GU cancer: part 1-organ-sparing procedures in renal and adrenal tumors: a systematic review.

Authors:  Raouf Seyam; Mahmoud I Khalil; Mohamed H Kamel; Waleed M Altaweel; Rodney Davis; Nabil K Bissada
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2019-01-08       Impact factor: 2.370

2.  Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate Decline at 1 Year After Minimally Invasive Partial Nephrectomy: A Multimodel Comparison of Predictors.

Authors:  Fabio Crocerossa; Cristian Fiori; Umberto Capitanio; Andrea Minervini; Umberto Carbonara; Savio D Pandolfo; Davide Loizzo; Daniel D Eun; Alessandro Larcher; Andrea Mari; Antonio Andrea Grosso; Fabrizio Di Maida; Lance J Hampton; Francesco Cantiello; Rocco Damiano; Francesco Porpiglia; Riccardo Autorino
Journal:  Eur Urol Open Sci       Date:  2022-03-03

3.  The Use of Tissue Adhesive for Tumor Bed Closure during Partial Nephrectomy is Associated with Reduced Devascularized Functional Volume Loss.

Authors:  Ofir Avitan; Miguel Gorenberg; Edmond Sabo; Zaher Bahouth; Sagi Shprits; Sarel Halachmi; Boaz Moskovitz; Ofer Nativ
Journal:  Curr Urol       Date:  2019-10-01

4.  Ischemia Techniques in Nephron-sparing Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Surgical, Oncological, and Functional Outcomes.

Authors:  Francesco Greco; Riccardo Autorino; Vincenzo Altieri; Steven Campbell; Vincenzo Ficarra; Inderbir Gill; Alexander Kutikov; Alex Mottrie; Vincenzo Mirone; Hendrik van Poppel
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2018-10-13       Impact factor: 24.267

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.