Nephrometry scores: a validation of three systems for peri-operative outcomes in retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy.
#KidneyCancer
#kcsm
#uroonc
nephrometry
partial nephrectomy
retroperitoneal
validation
Journal
BJU international
ISSN: 1464-410X
Titre abrégé: BJU Int
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100886721
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2021
07 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
2
10
2020
medline:
15
12
2021
entrez:
1
10
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To externally validate the RENAL, PADUA and SPARE nephrometry scoring systems for use in retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN). Nephrometry scores were calculated for 322 consecutive patients receiving retroperitoneal RAPN at a tertiary referral centre from 2017. Patients with multiple tumours were excluded. Scores were correlated with peri-operative outcomes, including the trifecta (warm ischaemia time <25 min, no peri-operative complications and a negative surgical margin), both as continuous and categorical variables. Comparisons were performed using Spearman correlation and ability to predict the trifecta was assessed using binomial logistical regression. All three scoring systems correlated significantly with the main variables (operating time, warm ischaemia time and estimated blood loss), both as continuous and categorical variables. Only PADUA and SPARE were able to predict achievement of the trifecta (PADUA area under the curve [AUC] 0.623, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.559-0.668; SPARE AUC 0.612, 95% CI 0.548-0.677). This study validates the RENAL, PADUA and SPARE scoring systems to predict key intra-operative outcomes in retroperitoneal RAPN. Only PADUA and SPARE were able to predict achievement of the trifecta. As a simplified version of the PADUA scoring system with comparable outcomes, we recommend using the SPARE system.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Validation Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
36-45Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© 2021 The Authors BJU International © 2021 BJU International.
Références
Ljunberg B, Bensalah K, Canfield S et al. EAU guidelines on renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 2015; 67: 913-24
Kutikov A, Uzzo RG. The R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score: a comprehensive standardized system for quantitating renal tumor size, location and depth. J Urol 2009; 182: 844-53
Ficarra V, Novara G, Secco S et al. Preoperative aspects and dimensions used for an anatomical (PADUA) classification of renal tumours in patients who are candidates for nephron-sparing surgery. Eur Urol 2009; 56: 786-93
Veccia A, Antonelli A, Uzzo R et al. Predictive value of nephrometry scores in nephron-sparing surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus 2020; 6: 490-504
Schiavina R, Novara G, Borghesi M et al. PADUA and R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry scores correlate with perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: analysis of the Vattikuti Global Quality Initiative in Robotic Urologic Surgery (GQI-RUS) database. BJU Int 2017; 119: 456-63
Mottrie A, Schatteman P, De Wil P, De Troyer B, Novara G, Vincenzo F. Validation of the preoperative aspects and dimensions used for an anatomical (PADUA) score in a robot-assisted partial nephrectomy series. Worl J Urol 2013; 31: 799-804
Ellison JS, Montgomery JS, Hafez KS et al. Association of RENAL nephrometry score with outcomes of minimally invasive partial nephrectomy. Int J Urol 2013; 20: 564-70
Ficarra V, Bhayani S, Porter J et al. Predictors of warm ischemia time and perioperative complications in a multicenter, international series of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol 2012; 61: 395-402
Okhunov Z, Rais-Bahrami S, George AK et al. The comparison of three renal tumor scoring systems: C-index, P.A.D.U.A., and R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry scores. J Endourol 2011; 25: 1921-4
Bylund JR, Gayheart D, Fleming T et al. Association of tumor size, location, R.E.N.A.L., PADUA and centrality index score with perioperative outcomes and postoperative renal function. J Urol 2012; 188: 1684-9
Zhang ZY, Tang Q, Zhang Q et al. Clinical analysis of the PADUA and the RENAL scoring systems for renal neoplasms: a retrospective study of 245 patients undergoing laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Int J Urol 2013; 21: 40-4
Gupta R, Tori M, Babitz SK et al. Comparison of RENAL, PADUA, CSA, and PAVP nephrometry scores in predicting functional outcomes after partial nephrectomy. Urology 2019; 124: 160-7
Spaliviero M, Poon BY, Aras O et al. Interobserver variability of R.E.N.A.L., padua, and centrality index nephrometry score systems. World J Urol 2015; 33: 853-8
Ficarra V, Porpiglia F, Crestani A et al. The simplified PADUA REnal (SPARE) nephrometry system: a novel classification of parenchymal renal tumours suitable for partial nephrectomy. BJU Int 2019; 124: 621-8
Khalifeh A, Autorino R, Hillyer SP et al. Comparative outcomes and assessment of trifecta in 500 robotic and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy cases: a single surgeon experience. J Urol 2013; 189: 1236-42
Malki M, Hussain M, Crockett Met al.Can retroperitoneal robotic assisted partial nephrectomy be the default approach? Manuscript submitted, awaiting review.
Porpiglia F, Mari A, Amparore D et al. Transperitoneal vs retroperitoneal minimally invasive partial nephrectomy: comparison of perioperative outcomes and functional follow-up in a large multi-institutional cohort (The RECORD 2 Project). Surg Endosc 2020 online ahead of print. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-07919-4
Bindayi A, Autorino R, Capitanio U et al. Trifecta outcomes of partial nephrectomy in patients over 75 years old: analysis of the REnal SURGery in Elderly (RESURGE) group. Eur Urol Focus 2020; 6: 982-90
Rai BP, Patel A, Abroaf A et al. External validation of four nephrometry scores for trans-peritoneal robotic partial nephrectomy. Cent Eur J Urol 2017; 70: 232-7
Azawi NH, Andersen MFB, Kercsik ARS, Joensen UN. PADUA and RENAL nephrometry score systems could not predict postoperative outcomes after partial nephrectomy of small renal masses in a Danish cohort. J Urol Res 2016; 3: 1072
Roushias S, Vasdev N, Ganai B et al. Can the R.E.N.A.L nephrometry score preoperatively predict postoperative clinical outcomes in patients undergoing open and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy? Curr Urol 2013; 7: 90-7
Zargar H, Allaf ME, Bhayani S. Trifecta and optimal perioperative outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in surgical treatment of small renal masses: a multi-institutional study. BJU Int 2015; 116: 407-14
Ubrig B, Roosen A, Wagner C et al. Tumor complexity and the impact on MIC and trifecta in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a multi-center study of over 500 cases. World J Urol 2018; 36: 783-8
Harke NN, Mandel P, Witt JH et al. Are there limits of robotic partial nephrectomy? TRIFECTA outcomes of open and robotic partial nephrectomy for completely endophytic renal tumours. J Surg Oncol 2018; 118: 206-11
Davidiuk AJ, Parker AS, Thomas CS et al. Mayo adhesive probability score: an accurate image-based scoring system to predict adherent perinephric fat in partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol 2014; 66: 1165-71
Malki M, Oakley J, Hussain M, Barber N. Retroperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in obese patients. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2019; 29: 1027-32
Paulucci DJ, Whalen MJ, Badani KK. Analysis of the transperitoneal approach to robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for the treatment of anterior and posterior renal masses. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2015; 25: 880
Harris KT, Ball MW, Gorin MA et al. Transperitoneal robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a comparison of posterior and anterior renal masses. J Endourol 2014; 28: 655
Reinhard R, van der Zon-Conijn M, Smithuis R. Kidney - solid masses. Website: Radiology Assistant. 14 June 2016. Available at: https://radiologyassistant.nl/abdomen/kidney-solid-masses#ct-protocol. Accessed April 2020