Christine W Liaw1, Jared S Winoker1, Reza Mehrazin2. 1. Department of Urology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 1 Gustave Levy Place, New York, NY, 10029, USA. 2. Department of Urology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 1 Gustave Levy Place, New York, NY, 10029, USA. reza.mehrazin@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the growth kinetics of small renal masses and available imaging modalities for mass characterization and surveillance, highlight current organizational recommendations for the active surveillance of small renal masses, and discuss the most recently reported oncological outcomes of patients as they relate to various surveillance imaging protocols and progression to delayed intervention. RECENT FINDINGS: Overall, organizational guideline recommendations are broad and lack specifics regarding timing and modality for follow-up imaging of small renal masses. Additionally, despite general consensus in the literature about certain criteria to trigger delayed intervention, there exist no formal guidelines. Active surveillance of small renal masses is an acceptable management strategy for patients with prohibitive surgical risk; however, standardized imaging protocols for surveillance are lacking, as are randomized, prospective trials to evaluate the ideal follow-up protocol.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the growth kinetics of small renal masses and available imaging modalities for mass characterization and surveillance, highlight current organizational recommendations for the active surveillance of small renal masses, and discuss the most recently reported oncological outcomes of patients as they relate to various surveillance imaging protocols and progression to delayed intervention. RECENT FINDINGS: Overall, organizational guideline recommendations are broad and lack specifics regarding timing and modality for follow-up imaging of small renal masses. Additionally, despite general consensus in the literature about certain criteria to trigger delayed intervention, there exist no formal guidelines. Active surveillance of small renal masses is an acceptable management strategy for patients with prohibitive surgical risk; however, standardized imaging protocols for surveillance are lacking, as are randomized, prospective trials to evaluate the ideal follow-up protocol.
Entities:
Keywords:
Active surveillance; Delayed intervention; Imaging; Renal cell carcinoma; Small renal mass
Authors: Sanoj Punnen; Massom A Haider; Gina Lockwood; Fenella Moulding; Martin E O'Malley; Michael A S Jewett Journal: J Urol Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Ivan Pedrosa; Mary T Chou; Long Ngo; Ronaldo H Baroni; Elizabeth M Genega; Laura Galaburda; William C DeWolf; Neil M Rofsky Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2007-09-26 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Andrew G McIntosh; Benjamin T Ristau; Karen Ruth; Rachel Jennings; Eric Ross; Marc C Smaldone; David Y T Chen; Rosalia Viterbo; Richard E Greenberg; Alexander Kutikov; Robert G Uzzo Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2018-04-04 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Reza Mehrazin; Marc C Smaldone; Brian Egleston; Jeffrey J Tomaszewski; Charles W Concodora; Timothy K Ito; Philip H Abbosh; David Y T Chen; Alexander Kutikov; Robert G Uzzo Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2015-03-14 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Ross J Mason; Mohamed Abdolell; Greg Trottier; Christopher Pringle; Joseph G Lawen; David G Bell; Michael A S Jewett; Laurence Klotz; Ricardo A Rendon Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2011-02-22 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Rahul Rajendran; Kevan Iffrig; Deepak K Pruthi; Allison Wheeler; Brian Neuman; Dharam Kaushik; Ahmed M Mansour; Karen Panetta; Sos Agaian; Michael A Liss Journal: Adv Urol Date: 2019-04-23
Authors: Florian Hagen; Felix Peisen; Jakob Spogis; Antonia Mair; Konstantin Nikolaou; Arnulf Stenzl; Stephan Kruck; Jens Bedke; Sascha Kaufmann; Wolfgang M Thaiss Journal: Cancer Imaging Date: 2022-01-21 Impact factor: 3.909