Refine
Year of publication
- 2018 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- Surgical and invasive medical procedures (2) (remove)
Institute
- Medizin (2)
Background: Does the dogma of nephron sparing surgery (NSS) still stand for large renal masses? Available studies dealing with that issue are considerably biased often mixing imperative with elective indications for NSS and also including less malignant variants or even benign renal tumors. Here, we analyzed the oncological long-term outcomes of patients undergoing elective NSS or radical tumor nephrectomy (RN) for non-endophytic, large (≥7cm) clear cell renal carcinoma (ccRCC).
Methods: Prospectively acquired, clinical databases from two academic high-volume centers were screened for patients from 1980 to 2010. The query was strictly limited to patients with elective indications. Surgical complications were retrospectively assessed and classified using the Clavien-Dindo-classification system (CDS). Overall survival (OS) and cancer specific survival (CSS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier-method and the log-rank test.
Results: Out of in total 8664 patients in the databases, 123 patients were identified (elective NSS (n = 18) or elective RN (n = 105)) for ≥7cm ccRCC. The median follow-up over all was 102 months (range 3–367 months). Compared to the RN group, the NSS group had a significantly longer median OS (p = 0.014) and median CSS (p = 0.04).
Conclusions: In large renal masses, NSS can be performed safely with acceptable complication rates. In terms of long-term OS and CSS, NSS was at least not inferior to RN. Our findings suggest that NSS should also be performed in patients presenting with renal tumors ≥7cm whenever technically feasible. Limitations include its retrospective nature and the limited availability of data concerning long-term development of renal function in the two groups.
Purpose: The aim of the study was to compare three different elastography methods, namely Strain Elastography (SE), Point Shear-Wave Elastography (pSWE) using Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse (ARFI)-Imaging and 2D-Shear Wave Elastography (2D-SWE), in the same study population for the differentiation of thyroid nodules.
Materials and methods: All patients received a conventional ultrasound scan, SE and 2D-SWE, and all patients except for two received ARFI-Imaging. Cytology/histology of thyroid nodules was used as a reference method. SE measures the relative stiffness within the region of interest (ROI) using the surrounding tissue as reference tissue. ARFI mechanically excites the tissue at the ROI using acoustic pulses to generate localized tissue displacements. 2D-SWE measures tissue elasticity using the velocity of many shear waves as they propagate through the tissue.
Results: 84 nodules (73 benign and 11 malignant) in 62 patients were analyzed. Sensitivity, specificity and NPV of SE were 73%, 70% and 94%, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity and NPV of ARFI and 2D-SWE were 90%, 79%, 98% and 73%, 67%, 94% respectively, using a cut-off value of 1.98m/s for ARFI and 2.65m/s (21.07kPa) for 2D-SWE. The AUROC (Area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic) of SE, ARFI and 2D-SWE for the diagnosis of malignant thyroid nodules were 52%, 86% and 71%, respectively. A significant difference in AUROC was found between SE and ARFI (p = 0.008), while no significant difference was found between ARFI and SWE (86% vs. 71%, p = 0.31), or SWE and SE (71% vs. 52%, p = 0.26).
Conclusion: pSWE using ARFI and 2D-SWE showed comparable results for the differentiation of thyroid nodules. ARFI was superior to elastography using SE.