Renato Corradi1, Aashish Kabra2, Melissa Suarez3, Jacob Oppenheimer2, Zhamshid Okhunov3, Hugh White4, Stephanie Nougaret5,6,7, Hebert A Vargas1, Jaime Landman3, Jonathan Coleman1, Michael A Liss8. 1. Department of Urology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 2. Department of Urology, University of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio, 7703, Floyd Curl Drive, San Antonio, TX, USA. 3. Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA. 4. Department of Radiology, University of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA. 5. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 6. INSERM, U1194, Institut de Recherche en Cancérologie de Montpellier (IRCM), Montpellier, France. 7. Service de Radiologie, Institut Régional du Cancer de Montpellier, Montpellier, France. 8. Department of Urology, University of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio, 7703, Floyd Curl Drive, San Antonio, TX, USA. liss@uthscsa.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a recently published volume-based renal function prediction calculator intended to be used in small renal mass surgical counseling. METHODS: Retrospective data collection included three-dimensional calculation of renal mass and parenchyma of patients who have undergone extirpative therapy. The predicted glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was calculated using the online calculator. The predicted GFR was compared with the actual 6-month GFR. The Pearson correlation coefficient, paired t test and root-mean-square error (RMSE) are utilized for statistical analysis. RESULTS: After institutional review board approval, three institutions provided data for analysis. After patients with renal mass size >300 cc, renal size >400 cc or preoperative CKD ≥stage 3 had been excluded, we retrospectively analyzed data from 136 patients. The median mass volume was 22.2 cc (IQR 7-49). In multiple linear regression analysis, the most significant variables predicting postoperative GFR were partial versus radical nephrectomy and preoperative GFR with an overall R2 of .68 (F = 26.13, P < .001). The predicted GFR was 75.4 mL/min/1.73 m2 compared to an actual GFR of 70.7 mL/min/1.73 m2 (P < .001, paired t test). The predicted GFR was highly correlated with the actual postoperative GFR at 6 months (Pearson correlation, r = .65, P < .001). RMSE of the validation cohort was 16.87. CONCLUSIONS: The predictive tool to determine renal function benefit of nephron sparing surgery compared to radical nephrectomy online calculator effectively predicts GFR and could potentially be used to help urologists and patients discuss renal function prior to extirpative renal surgery.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a recently published volume-based renal function prediction calculator intended to be used in small renal mass surgical counseling. METHODS: Retrospective data collection included three-dimensional calculation of renal mass and parenchyma of patients who have undergone extirpative therapy. The predicted glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was calculated using the online calculator. The predicted GFR was compared with the actual 6-month GFR. The Pearson correlation coefficient, paired t test and root-mean-square error (RMSE) are utilized for statistical analysis. RESULTS: After institutional review board approval, three institutions provided data for analysis. After patients with renal mass size >300 cc, renal size >400 cc or preoperative CKD ≥stage 3 had been excluded, we retrospectively analyzed data from 136 patients. The median mass volume was 22.2 cc (IQR 7-49). In multiple linear regression analysis, the most significant variables predicting postoperative GFR were partial versus radical nephrectomy and preoperative GFR with an overall R2 of .68 (F = 26.13, P < .001). The predicted GFR was 75.4 mL/min/1.73 m2 compared to an actual GFR of 70.7 mL/min/1.73 m2 (P < .001, paired t test). The predicted GFR was highly correlated with the actual postoperative GFR at 6 months (Pearson correlation, r = .65, P < .001). RMSE of the validation cohort was 16.87. CONCLUSIONS: The predictive tool to determine renal function benefit of nephron sparing surgery compared to radical nephrectomy online calculator effectively predicts GFR and could potentially be used to help urologists and patients discuss renal function prior to extirpative renal surgery.
Authors: Hendrik Van Poppel; Luigi Da Pozzo; Walter Albrecht; Vsevolod Matveev; Aldo Bono; Andrzej Borkowski; Jean-Marie Marechal; Laurence Klotz; Eila Skinner; Thomas Keane; Ilse Claessens; Richard Sylvester Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2006-11-15 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Christopher J Weight; Paul L Crispen; Rodney H Breau; Simon P Kim; Christine M Lohse; Stephen A Boorjian; R Houston Thompson; Bradley C Leibovich Journal: BJU Int Date: 2012-04-13 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: John M Hollingsworth; David C Miller; Stephanie Daignault; Brent K Hollenbeck Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2006-09-20 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Emil Scosyrev; Edward M Messing; Richard Sylvester; Steven Campbell; Hendrik Van Poppel Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-07-02 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Michael A Liss; Robert DeConde; Dominique Caovan; Joseph Hofler; Michael Gabe; Kerrin L Palazzi; Nishant D Patel; Hak J Lee; Trey Ideker; Hendrik Van Poppel; David Karow; Michael Aertsen; Giovanna Casola; Ithaar H Derweesh Journal: J Endourol Date: 2015-09-25 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Brian R Lane; Shay Golan; Scott Eggener; Conrad M Tobert; Richard J Kahnoski; Alexander Kutikov; Marc Smaldone; Christopher M Whelan; Arieh Shalhav; Robert G Uzzo Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-01-09 Impact factor: 7.450