Predicting outcomes in partial nephrectomy: is the renal score useful?
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2017 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | International Braz J Urol (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382017000300422 |
Resumo: | ABSTRACT Introduction and Objective The R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry system (RNS) has been validated in multiple open, laparoscopic and robotic partial nephrectomy series. The aim of this study was to test the accuracy of R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry system in predicting perioperative outcomes in surgical treatment of kidney tumors <7.0cm in a prospective model. Materials and Methods Seventy-one patients were selected and included in this prospective study. We evaluate the accuracy of RNS in predicting perioperative outcomes (WIT, OT, EBL, LOS, conversion, complications and surgical margins) in partial nephrectomy using ROC curves, univariate and multivariate analyses. R.E.N.A.L. was divided in 3 groups: low complexity (LC), medium complexity (MC) and high complexity (HC). Results No patients in LC group had WIT >20 min, versus 41.4% and 64.3% MC and HC groups respectively (p=0.03); AUC=0.643 (p=0.07). RNS was associated with convertion rate (LC:28.6% ; MC:47.6%; HC:77.3%, p=0.02). Patients with RNS <8 were most often subjected to partial nephrectomy (93% x 72%, p=0.03) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (56.8% x 28%, p=0.02), AUC=0.715 (p=0.002). The RNS was also associated with operative time. Patients with a score >8 had 6.06 times greater chance of having a surgery duration >180 min. (p=0.017), AUC=0.63 (p=0.059). R.E.N.A.L. score did not correlate with EBL, complications (Clavien >3), LOS or positive surgical margin. Conclusion R.E.N.A.L. score was a good method in predicting surgical access route and type of nephrectomy. Also was associated with OT and WIT, but with weak accuracy. Although, RNS was not associated with Clavien >3, EBL, LOS or positive surgical margin. |
id |
SBU-1_cb4d52fad418f5a573a11f1206514c1b |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S1677-55382017000300422 |
network_acronym_str |
SBU-1 |
network_name_str |
International Braz J Urol (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Predicting outcomes in partial nephrectomy: is the renal score useful?NephrectomyOperative TimePatientsABSTRACT Introduction and Objective The R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry system (RNS) has been validated in multiple open, laparoscopic and robotic partial nephrectomy series. The aim of this study was to test the accuracy of R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry system in predicting perioperative outcomes in surgical treatment of kidney tumors <7.0cm in a prospective model. Materials and Methods Seventy-one patients were selected and included in this prospective study. We evaluate the accuracy of RNS in predicting perioperative outcomes (WIT, OT, EBL, LOS, conversion, complications and surgical margins) in partial nephrectomy using ROC curves, univariate and multivariate analyses. R.E.N.A.L. was divided in 3 groups: low complexity (LC), medium complexity (MC) and high complexity (HC). Results No patients in LC group had WIT >20 min, versus 41.4% and 64.3% MC and HC groups respectively (p=0.03); AUC=0.643 (p=0.07). RNS was associated with convertion rate (LC:28.6% ; MC:47.6%; HC:77.3%, p=0.02). Patients with RNS <8 were most often subjected to partial nephrectomy (93% x 72%, p=0.03) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (56.8% x 28%, p=0.02), AUC=0.715 (p=0.002). The RNS was also associated with operative time. Patients with a score >8 had 6.06 times greater chance of having a surgery duration >180 min. (p=0.017), AUC=0.63 (p=0.059). R.E.N.A.L. score did not correlate with EBL, complications (Clavien >3), LOS or positive surgical margin. Conclusion R.E.N.A.L. score was a good method in predicting surgical access route and type of nephrectomy. Also was associated with OT and WIT, but with weak accuracy. Although, RNS was not associated with Clavien >3, EBL, LOS or positive surgical margin.Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia2017-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382017000300422International braz j urol v.43 n.3 2017reponame:International Braz J Urol (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)instacron:SBU10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2016.0315info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMatos,André CostaDall´Oglio,Marcos F.Colombo Jr,José RobertoCrippa,AlexandreJuveniz,João A. Q.Argolo,Felipe Coelhoeng2017-05-31T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1677-55382017000300422Revistahttp://www.brazjurol.com.br/ONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||brazjurol@brazjurol.com.br1677-61191677-5538opendoar:2017-05-31T00:00International Braz J Urol (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Predicting outcomes in partial nephrectomy: is the renal score useful? |
title |
Predicting outcomes in partial nephrectomy: is the renal score useful? |
spellingShingle |
Predicting outcomes in partial nephrectomy: is the renal score useful? Matos,André Costa Nephrectomy Operative Time Patients |
title_short |
Predicting outcomes in partial nephrectomy: is the renal score useful? |
title_full |
Predicting outcomes in partial nephrectomy: is the renal score useful? |
title_fullStr |
Predicting outcomes in partial nephrectomy: is the renal score useful? |
title_full_unstemmed |
Predicting outcomes in partial nephrectomy: is the renal score useful? |
title_sort |
Predicting outcomes in partial nephrectomy: is the renal score useful? |
author |
Matos,André Costa |
author_facet |
Matos,André Costa Dall´Oglio,Marcos F. Colombo Jr,José Roberto Crippa,Alexandre Juveniz,João A. Q. Argolo,Felipe Coelho |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Dall´Oglio,Marcos F. Colombo Jr,José Roberto Crippa,Alexandre Juveniz,João A. Q. Argolo,Felipe Coelho |
author2_role |
author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Matos,André Costa Dall´Oglio,Marcos F. Colombo Jr,José Roberto Crippa,Alexandre Juveniz,João A. Q. Argolo,Felipe Coelho |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Nephrectomy Operative Time Patients |
topic |
Nephrectomy Operative Time Patients |
description |
ABSTRACT Introduction and Objective The R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry system (RNS) has been validated in multiple open, laparoscopic and robotic partial nephrectomy series. The aim of this study was to test the accuracy of R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry system in predicting perioperative outcomes in surgical treatment of kidney tumors <7.0cm in a prospective model. Materials and Methods Seventy-one patients were selected and included in this prospective study. We evaluate the accuracy of RNS in predicting perioperative outcomes (WIT, OT, EBL, LOS, conversion, complications and surgical margins) in partial nephrectomy using ROC curves, univariate and multivariate analyses. R.E.N.A.L. was divided in 3 groups: low complexity (LC), medium complexity (MC) and high complexity (HC). Results No patients in LC group had WIT >20 min, versus 41.4% and 64.3% MC and HC groups respectively (p=0.03); AUC=0.643 (p=0.07). RNS was associated with convertion rate (LC:28.6% ; MC:47.6%; HC:77.3%, p=0.02). Patients with RNS <8 were most often subjected to partial nephrectomy (93% x 72%, p=0.03) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (56.8% x 28%, p=0.02), AUC=0.715 (p=0.002). The RNS was also associated with operative time. Patients with a score >8 had 6.06 times greater chance of having a surgery duration >180 min. (p=0.017), AUC=0.63 (p=0.059). R.E.N.A.L. score did not correlate with EBL, complications (Clavien >3), LOS or positive surgical margin. Conclusion R.E.N.A.L. score was a good method in predicting surgical access route and type of nephrectomy. Also was associated with OT and WIT, but with weak accuracy. Although, RNS was not associated with Clavien >3, EBL, LOS or positive surgical margin. |
publishDate |
2017 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2017-06-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382017000300422 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382017000300422 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2016.0315 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
International braz j urol v.43 n.3 2017 reponame:International Braz J Urol (Online) instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU) instacron:SBU |
instname_str |
Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU) |
instacron_str |
SBU |
institution |
SBU |
reponame_str |
International Braz J Urol (Online) |
collection |
International Braz J Urol (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
International Braz J Urol (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||brazjurol@brazjurol.com.br |
_version_ |
1750318075451801600 |