RESUMO
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the predictive value of individual components of the R.E.N.A.L scoring system for Laparoscopic (LPN) and Robotic Partial Nephrectomy (RPN). METHODS: Patients that had undergone a Laparoscopic (LPN) or Robotic Partial Nephrectomy (RPN) between 2018 and 2023 were reviewed. Our data collection included Race, Ethnicity, Age, BMI, R.E.N.A.L nephrometry score, and complications. Cases that achieved trifecta outcomes were designated as "Group A" and cases that did not achieve trifecta were "Group B". All the data were collected using REDCap database. RESULTS: A total of 111 cases were included, Group A consisted of 82% of all cases, whereas Group B 18%. Radius score demonstrated significant distinction concerning trifecta attainment and was the most predictive component of the 5 scoring metrics of the nephrometry system. In a subgroup analysis, R-score of 3 or a renal mass measuring ≥ 7 cm, was a significant independent negative predictor for trifecta outcomes, as well as tumor size at presentation. CONCLUSION: Renal nephrometry score is predictive of trifecta outcomes for patients undergoing laparoscopic or robotic partial nephrectomy. Radius of mass was the most effective predictive component of the nephrometry score for trifecta prediction.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Renais , Laparoscopia , Nefrectomia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos , Humanos , Nefrectomia/métodos , Laparoscopia/métodos , Masculino , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neoplasias Renais/cirurgia , Neoplasias Renais/patologia , Resultado do Tratamento , Idoso , Estudos Retrospectivos , Valor Preditivo dos TestesRESUMO
BACKGROUND: We investigated the association between the pretreatment quality of life (QOL) and overall survival (OS) in patients with urothelial carcinoma (UC), as the influence of pretreatment QOL on prognosis remains unclear in patients with localized and metastatic UC. METHODS: Between June 2013 and May 2019, we retrospectively investigated 205 patients with UC who received radical cystectomy or nephroureterectomy for non-metastatic UC (M0 group) or systemic chemotherapy for metastatic UC (M1 group). Patients answered the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire C30 (QLQ-C30) before the treatments. Patients were stratified into two groups: QOL high and low according to the optimal cutoff scores which were defined by receiver operating characteristic curve. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)-adjusted multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to investigate the clinical implication of pretreatment QOL score on OS in patients with UC. RESULTS: The number of patients in the M0 and M1 groups was 125 and 80, respectively. Optimal cutoff values in global, fatigue, pain, appetite loss, physical, and role scores were < 50, > 33, > 33, > 16, < 80, and < 67, respectively. IPTW-adjusted multivariate Cox regression analyses revealed that appetite loss score indicated a significantly poorer OS in the M1 group. No significant association of QOL with OS was observed in the M0 group. CONCLUSION: Pretreatment QOL of appetite loss may predict poor prognosis of patients with metastatic UC.