Literature DB >> 31158083

Performance Prediction for Surgical Outcomes in Partial Nephrectomy Using Nephrometry Scores: A Comparison of Arterial Based Complexity (ABC), RENAL, and PADUA Systems.

Ricardo G Alvim1, François Audenet1, Emily A Vertosick2, Daniel D Sjoberg2, Karim A Touijer3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Several standardized scoring systems are used to quantify renal tumor complexity on the basis of anatomic features to predict perioperative and postoperative outcomes of partial nephrectomy (PN).
OBJECTIVE: To compare the predictive accuracy and utility of the Arterial Based Complexity (ABC), RENAL, and PADUA scores. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Between January 2013 and March 2016, 304 patients at our institution underwent PN plus complete triphasic contrast computed tomography (CT) scans. Two urologists independently scored CT images to retrospectively evaluate each patient using the ABC, RENAL, and PADUA nephrometry scoring systems. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Interobserver variability was reported for each of the three nephrometry scores; κ=1 represented perfect agreement between the two urologists and κ=0 represented as much agreement as expected by chance. Univariate and multivariable linear regression models were used to investigate associations of the nephrometry scores with estimated blood loss (EBL), ischemia time, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at 18 mo. Coefficients of determination (R2) were compared to determine which nephrometry score accounted for the most variation in outcome. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The κ value was 0.52 for ABC, 0.53 for RENAL, and 0.63 for PADUA (all p≤0.001). On univariate analysis, there were no significant associations between nephrometry scores and postoperative eGFR; all three scores were highly associated with ischemia time (p<0.0001) and EBL (p≤0.001). R2 was not significantly different among the three scoring systems. On multivariable analysis, all three nephrometry scores were significantly associated with ischemia time (p<0.0001) and EBL (p≤0.01); only the RENAL score was associated with postoperative eGFR (p=0.044), so its performance on this metric could not be compared to that of ABC or PADUA.
CONCLUSIONS: The ABC, RENAL, and PADUA systems have similar performance for predicting EBL and ischemia time outcomes in PN, and are thus equally useful for assessing PN complexity. Further education and training are needed to reduce interobserver variability. PATIENT
SUMMARY: A new score system called Arterial Based Complexity (ABC) can be used to evaluate the complexity of a renal tumor and predict how difficult the tumor resection (partial nephrectomy) may be. This system performs well compared to other established systems and seems easy to learn and use.
Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Interobserver variability; Kidney cancer; Nephrometry; Nephron-sparing surgery; Outcomes prediction; Partial nephrectomy; Renal cell carcinoma; Renal tumor

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 31158083      PMCID: PMC9199452          DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.05.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol Oncol        ISSN: 2588-9311


  26 in total

1.  Critical appraisal of first-generation renal tumor complexity scoring systems: Creation of a second-generation model of tumor complexity.

Authors:  Conrad M Tobert; Allen Shoemaker; Richard J Kahnoski; Brian R Lane
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2015-02-07       Impact factor: 3.498

2.  Kidney tumor location measurement using the C index method.

Authors:  Matthew N Simmons; Christina B Ching; Mary K Samplaski; Chin Hyong Park; Inderbir S Gill
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2010-03-17       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Tumor size and invasiveness matters for partial nephrectomy: External validation and modification of the arterial based complexity score.

Authors:  Maximilian C Kriegmair; Svetlana Hetjens; Philipp Mandel; Jula Wadle; Johannes Budjan; Maurice S Michel; Daniel Pfalzgraf; Nina Wagener
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2017-02-10       Impact factor: 3.454

4.  An Arterial Based Complexity (ABC) Scoring System to Assess the Morbidity Profile of Partial Nephrectomy.

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

5.  Utility of the R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry scoring system in objectifying treatment decision-making of the enhancing renal mass.

Authors:  Daniel Canter; Alexander Kutikov; Brandon Manley; Brian Egleston; Jay Simhan; Marc Smaldone; Ervin Teper; Rosalia Viterbo; David Y T Chen; Richard E Greenberg; Robert G Uzzo
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 2.649

6.  Preoperative aspects and dimensions used for an anatomical (PADUA) classification of renal tumours in patients who are candidates for nephron-sparing surgery.

Authors:  Vincenzo Ficarra; Giacomo Novara; Silvia Secco; Veronica Macchi; Andrea Porzionato; Raffaele De Caro; Walter Artibani
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2009-08-04       Impact factor: 20.096

7.  A multidisciplinary evaluation of inter-reviewer agreement of the nephrometry score and the prediction of long-term outcomes.

Authors:  Christopher J Weight; Thomas D Atwell; Robert T Fazzio; Simon P Kim; McCabe Kenny; Christine M Lohse; Stephen A Boorjian; Bradley C Leibovich; R Houston Thompson
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-08-17       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  The R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score: a comprehensive standardized system for quantitating renal tumor size, location and depth.

Authors:  Alexander Kutikov; Robert G Uzzo
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2009-07-17       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Acute Kidney Injury after Partial Nephrectomy: Role of Parenchymal Mass Reduction and Ischemia and Impact on Subsequent Functional Recovery.

Authors:  Zhiling Zhang; Juping Zhao; Wen Dong; Eric Remer; Jianbo Li; Sevag Demirjian; Joseph Zabell; Steven C Campbell
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2015-10-30       Impact factor: 20.096

10.  R.E.N.A.L. Nephrometry scoring: how well correlated are urologist, radiologist, and collaborator scores?

Authors:  M Francesca Monn; Paul T Gellhaus; Timothy A Masterson; Aashish A Patel; Mark Tann; Dylan M Cregar; Ronald S Boris
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2014-05-28       Impact factor: 2.942

View more
  4 in total

1.  Learning curve in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: comparison between an expert surgeon and a team in training in single-center experiences.

Authors:  Nicolò Fiorello; Andrea Di Benedetto; Daniele Summonti; Andrea Mogorovich; Carlo Alberto Sepich
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2021-12-06

2.  Diagnostic and prognostic factors in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Katharina Beyer; Lisa Moris; Michael Lardas; Anna Haire; Francesco Barletta; Simone Scuderi; Megan Molnar; Ronald Herrera; Abdul Rauf; Riccardo Campi; Isabella Greco; Kirill Shiranov; Saeed Dabestani; Thomas van den Broeck; Sujenthiran Arun; Mauro Gacci; Giorgio Gandaglia; Muhammad Imran Omar; Steven MacLennan; Monique J Roobol; Bahman Farahmand; Eleni Vradi; Zsuzsanna Devecseri; Alex Asiimwe; Jihong Zong; Sara J Maclennan; Laurence Collette; James NDow; Alberto Briganti; Anders Bjartell; Mieke Van Hemelrijck
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-04-04       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 3.  Nephrometry scoring systems: their importance for the planning of nephron-sparing surgery and the relationships among them.

Authors:  Victor Dubeux; José Fernando Cardona Zanier; Carolina Gianella Cobo Chantong; Fabricio Carrerette; Pedro Nicolau Gabrich; Ronaldo Damião
Journal:  Radiol Bras       Date:  2022 Jul-Aug

4.  Practical evaluation of the R.E.N.A.L. score system in 150 laparoscopic nephron sparing surgeries.

Authors:  Victor T Dubeux; José Fernando C Zanier; Pedro N Gabrich; Fabricio B Carrerette; José C A Milfont; Ronaldo Damião
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2022 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.541

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.