Differences in Overall and Cancer-specific Survival of Patients Presenting With Chromophobe Versus Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate prognostic parameters for the oncological outcome of patients treated for chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (chRCC) in comparison with patients treated for clear cell RCC (ccRCC) using propensity score matching for survival analysis. METHODS: From 1969 to 2009, we identified 1010 from 3567 patients with RCC. Survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimate for histological subtypes including 109 chRCC and 901 ccRCC. Uni- and multivariate Cox regression was used to analyze prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for differences in patient characteristics among histological subgroups. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 61 months (range 0-289). chRCC showed longer OS (5 year, 90.1%; 10 year, 74.2%; 15 year, 61.4%) and CSS (94.2%, 89.7%, 89.7%) compared with ccRCC (OS 75.7%, 54.9%, 46.1% and CSS 84.7%, 75.4%, 72.2%; P = .002). Multivariate Cox regression revealed histology as a significant prognostic factor. Propensity score matching showed a difference in 72.4% (OS) and 87.2% (CSS) of matching attempts confirming the significant impact of histology. Univariate Cox regression showed nephron sparing surgery, no metastasis and no symptoms at presentation, age <65, eosinophilic features, low American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and Charlson Comorbidity Index to be beneficial for CSS. Only age at surgery, metastasis at presentation, and American Society of Anesthesiologists and Charlson Comorbidity Index scores were significant factors for OS in chRCC patients. CONCLUSION: ChRCC appears to have a favorable outcome compared with ccRCC. Even after adjustment for differences in characteristics known to have an influence on survival by propensity score matching, histology remains a significant prognostic factor.

Presentation, Management and Long-Term Outcome of Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction in Duplex Kidneys.

PURPOSE: Ureteropelvic junction obstruction in association with a duplex collecting system is a rare but challenging upper urinary tract pathology. We report our 21-year experience with this anomaly in terms of presentation, diagnostic evaluation and management. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified all patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction in a duplex collecting system between 1991 and 2012. We reviewed each case for presenting symptoms, anatomy and management. Median followup was 10.8 years (range 2 to 22). RESULTS: Ureteropelvic junction obstruction in duplex kidneys was diagnosed in 21 patients. Ten patients presented with clinical symptoms such as flank pain and urinary tract infection but 11 were asymptomatic. Six patients were diagnosed by prenatal ultrasound. The lower pole and the upper pole were affected in 22 and 3 renal units, respectively. Bilateral ureteropelvic junction obstruction was found in 4 cases. Duplication was complete in 5 patients, incomplete in 11 and undetermined in 5. Surgery was performed in 14 patients, including pyelopyelostomy or ureteropyelostomy in 7, dismembered pyeloplasty in 6 and heminephrectomy in 1. Reintervention was required in 1 case. Conservative treatment was adopted in 7 patients with clinically insignificant obstruction and unimpaired renal function. In all of these patients upper urinary tract dilatation gradually improved during 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: Ureteropelvic junction obstruction in a duplex kidney is a rare but challenging anomaly that requires careful evaluation. Treatment should be individualized according to clinical presentation (symptomatic/asymptomatic), anatomy (lower/upper pole), duplication type (complete/incomplete) and obstruction with time (severity/development) on dynamic renogram.