肾肿瘤评分系统的临床应用新进展

肾肿瘤手术方式的选择主要取决于肿瘤解剖特征。为了量化肿瘤的解剖特征,已有多种评分系统被提出。其中以第一代评分系统R.E.N.A.L系统、PADUA评分系统及C-index系统在临床应用较为广泛,本文就这三种评分系统的内容、优缺点、系统改良及在新型微创治疗中的应用以及第二代评分系统的新进展进行综述。     

近似肿瘤实质接触面积与肾部分切除术围手术期参数的相关性分析

目的:探讨近似肿瘤实质接触面积与肾部分切除术围手术期参数的相关性。方法:选择第二军医大学附属长海医院泌尿外科2014年1~7月因肾肿瘤入院并接受肾部分切除术治疗的94例患者为研究对象,根据术前CT或MRI图像,并参照球冠面积公式计算肾肿瘤与肾实质接触面积的近似值(estimated tumor contact surface area,eCSA),以eCSA中位数13cm2将患者分成≥13cm2组(n=47)和13cm2组(n=47),比较两组间手术时间、肾缺血时间、术中出血量和术后肾功能等围手术期参数的差异,分析eCSA与肿瘤解剖学R.E.N.A.L.评分、PADUA评分以及上述围手术期参数的相关性。结果:94例患者均顺利完成手术,eCSA≥13cm2组肿瘤复杂性更高,其肿瘤大小、内生比例、R.E.N.A.L.评分和PADUA评分均高于13cm2组(P0.01)。eCSA≥13cm2组开放手术的比例更高(P0.05),其肾缺血时间及术中出血量分别长于、多于13cm2组(P0.01),但两组间手术用时、术后并发症发生率无明显差别(P0.05),相关分析提示eCSA与肿瘤大小、肿瘤内生程度、R.E.N.A.L.评分、PADUA评分、肾脏缺血时间、术中出血量以及术后肾功能下降幅度均显著相关(P0.01)。结论:以近似肿瘤实质接触面积作为参数能够客观地评价肾肿瘤的复杂性。该指标与肾部分切除术的缺血时间、手术出血量以及术后肾功能下降幅度均密切相关,可作为上述围手术期参数的预测因素,其临床应用价值有待进一步研究验证。     

R.E.N.A.L.肾肿瘤评分联合MAP肾周脂肪评分用于肾部分切除手术的临床意义

目的:探讨联合应用R.E.N.A.L.评分系统与肾周脂肪评分系统(mayo adhesive probability, MAP)对保留肾单位肾部分切除术(partial nephrectomy, PN)的临床意义。方法:回顾性分析宁夏医科大学总医院2011年1月—2017年12月140例行PN肾肿瘤患者的临床资料,其中男85例,女55例;行开放肾部分切除术(open partial nephrectomy, OPN)68例,行腹腔镜肾部分切除术(laparoscopic partial nephrectomy, LPN)72例。所有患者依据术前腹部CT结果进行R.E.N.A.L.评分与MAP评分,并根据评分结果分为R.E.N.A.L.低、中、高度组和MAP低、中、高度组。分析不同R.E.N.A.L.、MAP分度下患者手术方式及围手术期临床指标的差异。结果:R.E.N.A.L.低度组中,随MAP分度逐渐增高,行OPN患者的例数增多(P0.05);MAP低度组中,随R.E.N.A.L.分度的变化也有类似趋势(P0.05)。但在R.E.N.A.L.或MAP中、高度组中,随MAP或R.E.N.A.L.分度变化,行LPN和OPN患者的例数无明显差异(P0.05)。R.E.N.A.L.低度组行LPN者术中出血量较少,R.E.N.A.L.高度组行LPN者肾缺血时间较长。在R.E.N.A.L.低度组中,行LPN的MAP高度组患者术中出血量、手术时间均多于MAP低度组患者;R.E.N.A.L.中分度患者行LPN时,随MAP分度增加术中出血量增多。结论:R.E.N.A.L.评分系统联合MAP评分系统更能全面的评估PN手术的难度并指导PN手术术式的选择;尤其在R.E.N.A.L.低度组患者中,随着MAP评分增高,应更加积极进行术前准备或倾向于选择OPN术式。     

R.E.N.A.L.评分系统在经腹腹腔镜肾部分切除术治疗T1a期肾肿瘤中的应用

目的探讨肾脏肿瘤测量评分系统（R.E.N.A.L.评分系统）在T1a期肾肿瘤行经腹入路腹腔镜肾部分切除术（TLPN）中的应用价值。 方法回顾性分析2010年7月至2016年10月首都医科大学附属北京天坛医院泌尿外科67例行TLPN的T1a期肾肿瘤患者的临床资料,其中男52例（78％）,女15例（22％）,年龄26~75岁,平均（56±13）岁。肿瘤平均直径（2.5±0.8）cm,其中左侧32例（48％）,右侧35例（52％）;应用R.E.N.A.L.评分系统对肾脏肿瘤进行量化评分。比较低、中与高评分组在肿瘤最大径、热缺血时间、术中出血量、手术时间、术前术后肌酐及住院天数等临床指标的差异。 结果67例患者均顺利完成TLPN,无中转开放及死亡病例。平均R.E.N.A.L.评分为（6.3±1.7）分,其中低评分组有37例（55％）,中评分组有24例（36％）,高评分组有6例（9％）,低、中与高评分组肿瘤最大直径差异有统计学意义（F=5.230,P=0.008）,热缺血时间、术中出血量、手术时间、术前术后肌酐及住院天数差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。 结论使用R.E.N.A.L.评分系统评估TLPN治疗T1a期肾肿瘤手术风险及手术难易程度的价值有限,临床应用需慎重。     

R.E.N.A.L.肾脏肿瘤评分系统在肾脏肿瘤手术治疗中的临床应用价值分析

目的 探讨R.E.N.A.L.肾脏肿瘤评分系统在肾脏肿瘤手术治疗中的应用价值.方法 回顾性分析2007年1月～ 2012年8月194例保留肾单位手术(nephron-sparing surgery,NSS)的临床资料.根据CT/MRI对每例患者进行R.E.N.A.L.评分,按评分高低将肿瘤解剖复杂程度分为低度、中度、高度,了解评分与围手术期并发症的关系,采用logistic多因素回归分析NSS术后并发症的危险因素.结果 NSS 194例,其中147例行腹腔镜手术,47例行开放手术.低、中、高度评分肿瘤分别为89、98、7例,按评分高低进行分层分析,不同评分患者在手术时间、肾脏热缺血时间、术中出血量有统计学差异(P＜0.05),在手术方式上存在明显差异(x2=25.526,P=0.000).对NSS术后并发症的有关因素进行单因素分析显示,手术时间、术中出血量、肾脏热缺血时间、手术方式和R.E.N.A.L.评分是并发症发生的影响因素(P＜0.05),logistic多因素回归分析显示,R.E.N.A.L.评分高低和手术方式是预测并发症发生的危险因素(β=1.687,OR=1.05,95％ CI=1.010～1.090,P=0.025;β=2.325,0R=1.56,95％ CI=1.170～2.050,P=0.002).结论 R.E.N.A.L.评分系统能客观评判肾脏肿瘤的解剖复杂程度,对NSS术后并发症有判断作用,有利于手术方式的制定.     

基于R.E.N.A.L.评分系统分析T1期肾癌行腹腔镜下保留肾单位手术

目的:探讨R.E.N.A.L.评分系统对于T_1期肾癌行腹腔镜下保留肾单位肾癌根治术(laparoscopic partial nephrectomy,LPN)的临床意义及应用价值。方法:回顾分析我科2013年5月～2018年12月共102例行LPN治疗T_1期肾癌患者的临床资料。根据术前影像资料对患者行R.E.N.A.L.评分,将其分为低、中、高分组,比较术前及术后3个月血肌酐值的变化,分析各组间手术时间、热缺血时间、出血量、围手术并发症等的关系。结果:102例患者中,低、中、高组患者分别为64、35、3例,各组术前和术后3个月血肌酐值的变化比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05),低分组与中分组患者在性别、年龄、BMI、肿瘤直径大小、手术时间、中转开放率及并发症差异无统计学意义(P0.05),低分组中热缺血时间、出血量和术后住院天数明显低于中分组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:R.E.N.A.L.评分系统是评估肾肿瘤解剖复杂程度的重要手段,基于R.E.N.A.L.评分系统能有效评估T_1期肾癌行LPN治疗的难度和效果,为制定手术方案和指导术中操作提供参考依据。     

R.E.N.A.L评分在机器人辅助肾部分切除术中的应用

目的:探讨肾脏肿瘤测量评分系统(R.E.N.A.L评分)在机器人辅助腹腔镜肾部分切除术(RALPN)中评估手术成功率和手术结果的价值。方法:2010年3月~2014年5月,回顾性分析我科施行的45例RALPN的手术数据,并进行R.E.N.A.L评分。其中低危组(R.E.N.A.L评分7分)20例,中危组(R.E.N.A.L评分7~9分)15例,高危组(R.E.N.A.L评分≥10分)10例。将三组患者手术成功率、手术数据进行比较。结果:低危组均顺利完成RALPN;中危组13例完成RALPN,2例因行RALPN困难而行机器人辅助腹腔镜根治性肾切除术(RALRN);高危组7例完成RALPN,3例行RALRN。所有手术均在机器人辅助腹腔镜下完成,无中转开放手术。低危组平均手术时间(OT)、热缺血时间(WIT)、失血量(EBL)分别为(65.0±1.4)min、(14.0±0.9)min和(35.0±4.7)ml。中危组平均OT、WIT和EBL分别为(95.0±2.7)min、(22.0±1.6)min和(110.0±7.1)ml。高危组平均OT、WIT和EBL分别为(150.0±4.9)min、(30.0±2.1)min和(320.0±15.6)ml。三组间OT、WIT和EBL的差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。三组患者术后均无并发症出现。结论:对于RALPN,术前R.E.N.A.L评分同样与手术成功率、手术时间、失血量和热缺血时间有关。R.E.N.A.L评分≥10分不应该成为RALPN的禁忌证。     

改良R.E.N.A.L.评分在后腹腔镜肾部分切除术中的应用

目的探讨改良R.E.N.A.L.评分系统在后腹腔镜肾部分切除术(retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy,RLPN)中的应用。方法回顾性分析2007年1月至2014年6月79例行RLPN患者的临床资料,其中男51例,女28例,左侧42例,右侧37例,平均年龄(54.3±12.0)岁,平均BMI值(25.8±3.8)kg/m2,平均肿瘤直径(3.7±1.5)cm。应用改良R.E.N.A.L.评分系统对RLPN进行评分。结果 79例患者,未改良评分系统中低分组42例,中分组28例,高分组9例;改良评分系统中各组例数分别为31、32和16例。改良R.E.N.A.L.评分系统对手术难度的评判结果与手术时间、热缺血时间、术中出血量之间存在显著关系(P<0.05),而术后住院时间及并发症发生率差异无统计学意义(P<0.05)。将两套评分系统对手术难度评估的灵敏度、特异度、约登指数等加以比较后发现改良评分系统临床效果更好。结论改良R.E.N.A.L.评分更加符合后腹腔镜手术环境,且可更客观量化评估RLPN风险及手术难度,但仍需要多中心、大样本研究进一步支持。     

R.E.N.A.L.肾肿瘤评分系统与保留肾单位手术的相关研究

目的:探讨R.E.N.A.L.肾肿瘤评分系统用于保留肾单位手术(NSS)方式选择的临床意义。方法:回顾性分析行NSS的124例(127例次)肾肿瘤患者临床资料,按R.E.N.A.L.肾肿瘤评分系统进行评分,运用t检验、χ2检验、Fisher确切检验、logistic回归,分析R.E.N.A.L.肾肿瘤评分系统与NSS方式(腹腔镜或开放)的相互关系。结果:127例次手术中,良性肿瘤14例次,恶性肿瘤113例次;腹腔镜保留肾单位手术(LNSS)71例次,开放保留肾单位手术(ONSS)56例次;R.E.N.A.L.肾肿瘤评分系统低、中、高度复杂肿瘤分别为46例次、58例次、23例次,行LNSS分别为38例次(82.6%)、30例次(51.7%)、3例次(13.0%);LNSS组(5.8±1.9)和ONSS组(8.1±1.7)的R.E.N.A.L.评分均值差异有统计学意义(P0.05);R.E.N.A.L.肾肿瘤评分系统与LNSS方法的选择有显著相关性(χ2=30.9,P0.05),低度及大部分中度复杂肿瘤适合行LNSS;单因素R、E、N、L与NSS方法的选择有关,N与LNSS方式关联强度最大,而A、h无明显相关性。结论:R.E.N.A.L.肾肿瘤评分系统可评估肾肿瘤的复杂程度,并可指导NSS方式的选择。     

预测T1b期肾肿瘤保留肾单位手术疗效和安全性的列线图模型

目的分析R.E.N.A.L.、PADUA、C-index、DAP评分与T1b期肾肿瘤保留肾单位手术(NSS)疗效和安全性的相关性, 并通过组合多项参数构建预测手术疗效和安全性的列线图模型。方法回顾性分析海军军医大学第一附属医院2020年3月至2021年7月收治的80例接受NSS的T1b期肾肿瘤患者的资料。男59例, 女21例;年龄(56.9±10.2)岁。肿瘤直径(4.7±0.9)cm;左右侧各40例;肿瘤位于上/下极46例, 中部34例;肿瘤位于外侧59例, 内侧21例;肿瘤外凸64例, 内生16例;圆形肿瘤53例, 小叶形18例, 不规则形9例。R.E.N.A.L.评分中位值8(4～10)分, DAPUA评分9(6～12)分, C-index评分1.5(0.6～4.9)分, DAP评分7(4～9)分, 梅奥肾周粘连指数(MAP) 1(0～5)分。行开放手术1例, 腹腔镜手术43例, 机器人手术36例;经腹腔途径42例, 经后腹腔途径38例。将手术切缘阴性、热缺血时间<20 min、无严重并发症3项指标均实现的综合结局(MIC)作为评估手术疗效和安全性的主要指标;次要指标为手术...     

Nefrometrías: reproducibilidad interobservador y predicción de factores perioperatorios

ObjectivesTo validate the relation of the nephrometry scores in a series of patients who underwent partial nephrectomy with perioperative parameters and the urologist-radiologist reproducibility.Material and methodsA retrospective study of open and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy patients performed between 2005 and 2012 registered in prospective filled out database. An urologist and a radiologist calculated the R.E.N.A.L., PADUA and C-index for 86 patients. We carried out a comparative study of the results using the Spearman and Pearson correlation indexes.ResultsDistribution according to the complexity of the tumors with the RENAL calculation was: 42 (49%) low, 35 (41%) moderated and 9 (11%) high complexity. According to PADUA: 35 (41%) low complexity, 32 (37%) intermediate and 19 (22%) high. No statistically significant correlation was found for the appearance of operative complications and the pathology results in case of RENAL and PADUA. A correlation was found in the case of PADUA in relation to the warm ischemia time. Positive correlation according to Spearman's index was found in RENAL, PADUA and C-index between urologist and radiologist evaluations.ConclusionsNephrometry scores can be a useful tool to plan the surgical technique or approach. However, it is not clear if they are really predictors of surgical or pathologic parameters. The correlation between the urologist and radiologist seems to be sufficient to recommend their use by both specialties.     

Nephrometry score matched robotic vs. laparoscopic vs. open partial nephrectomy

To compare perioperative outcomes in the three most common partial nephrectomy modalities: robotic (RPN), laparoscopic (LPN), and open (OPN), matched for nephrometry scores. Patients aged 16–85 who underwent RPN, LPN, or OPN from 2007 to 2014 for localized renal carcinoma within our healthcare system were enrolled. Age, sex, body mass index, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) as well as perioperative outcomes of estimated blood loss (EBL), length of hospital stay (LOS), ischemia time (IT), change in eGFR, positive margin rate, operative time (OT), and emergency room visit rates were compared between RPN, LPN, and OPN using the R.E.N.A.L nephrometry score. A total of 862 patients underwent partial nephrectomy (523 LPN, 176 OPN, and 163 RPN). Patients who underwent OPN were significantly older, and had higher nephrometry scores and CCI. When matched for nephrometry scores, minimally invasive (LPN and RPN) compared to OPN had lower EBL (<?0.0001), shorter LOS (<?0.0001), shorter IT (<?0.001), and less change in eGFR (<?0.001), particularly in nephrometry scores higher than 8 (0.0099). Comparing RPN with LPN, RPN had significantly shorter OT in all nephrometry scores (<?0.001); shorter IT and LOS in nephrometry scores higher than 7. Our study suggests that minimally invasive partial nephrectomy may have superior outcomes to OPN when matched by nephrometry scores, particularly at higher scores and for RPN. This finding may contribute to a surgeon’s decision in the approach to partial nephrectomy.     

改良R.E.N.A.L.评分在RLPN治疗T1期肾癌中的临床应用及评价

目的 评价改良R.E.N.A.L.评分系统在后腹腔镜下T1期肾癌肾部分切除术中的临床应用效果.方法 回顾性分析2007年1月-2012年6月39例T1期肾癌患者临床资料,对相关资料使用改良设计的R.E.N.A.L评分系统进行评分.分析评分结果与手术时间、热缺血时间、术中出血量、围手术期并发症等因素的相互关系。结果 改良的R.E.N.A.L.评分系统与术中热缺血时间、手术时间、术中失血量存在明显关联（P＜0.05）,而因为研究对象较少,只有1例中等手术难度患者术后出现并发症,暂时无法评估改良R.E.N.A.L.评分系统与手术并发症之间的关系,有待进一步增加样本量。结论 改良R.E.N.A.L.评分系统较为准确地评价了后腹腔镜下T1肾癌肾部分切除术的手术难度,可作为术前T1肾癌患者后腹腔镜下肾癌肾部分切除术手术难度分级标准。     

A prospective comparison of the pathologic and surgical outcomes obtained after elective treatment of renal cell carcinoma by open or robot-assisted partial nephrectomy

ObjectiveTo prospectively compare surgical and pathologic outcomes obtained by elective robot-assisted (RAPN) or open partial nephrectomy (OPN) for small renal cell carcinoma (RCC).Materials and methodsBetween 2008 and 2010, after protocol design and patient consent, we prospectively collected clinical data for 100 patients who concurrently underwent either OPN (58) or RAPN (42) by an individual experienced surgeon. Clinical data included age, BMI, and past medical history. Operative data included operative time, warm ischemia time (WIT), and estimated blood loss (EBL). Postoperative outcomes included hospital stay (LOS), creatinine variation, Clavien complications, pathologic results, and survival. We stratified the complexity of the renal tumor using the R.E.N.A.L Nephrometry score.ResultsOf note, RAPN was superior to OPN in terms of EBL (median 143 mL vs. 415; P < 0.001) and LOS (median 3.8 days vs. 6.8; P < 0.0001). The median WIT for the RAPN group was 17.5 minutes (vs. 17.1 OPN; P = 0.3)) and the mean strict operative time was 134.8 minutes (vs. 128.4 OPN; P = 0.097). Regarding immediate, early, and short-term complications, variation of creatinine levels, and pathologic margins, the rates were equivalent for both groups (P > 0.05). According to the R.E.N.A.L nephrometry scores, both groups (RAPN/OPN) had similar rates (%) of low (81/72.4) and intermediate (19/20.7) complexity tumors, though there were 4 high complexity tumors in OPN group (vs. 0; P = 0.03).ConclusionWe found that RAPN is superior to the reference standard (OPN) surgical treatment of small RCCs in terms of blood loss and length of hospital stay with equivalent complications, warm ischemia time, and effect on renal function. Larger randomized trials with longer follow-up will give us further information and insight into the oncologic equivalence.     

Nephrometry and cumulative morbidity after partial nephrectomy: A standardized assessment of complications in the context of PADUA and R.E.N.A.L. scores

BackgroundNephrometry scores aid in clinical decision-making, yet evidence is scarce regarding their impact on cumulative morbidity following partial nephrectomy (PN).Patients and methodsRetrospective, monocentric study of 122 patients with suspicious renal masses undergoing open or robot-assisted PN between January 2019 and August 2020. Morbidity assessment followed European Association of Urology guidelines on complication reporting. 30-d complications were extracted using a PN-specific catalog, were graded by the Clavien-Dindo classification (CDC), and Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI®) values were calculated. The impact of nephrometry on cumulative morbidity was evaluated by (1) comparing morbidity estimates between Preoperative Aspects and Dimensions Used for an Anatomical (PADUA)/R.E.N.A.L. complexity groups, (2) by Pearson's correlation between nephrometry scores and CCI®, and (3) by multivariable regression models using any 30-d complication and 30-d CCI® as endpoints.ResultsOf 122 patients, 101 (83%) underwent open and 21 (17%) robot-assisted PN. Median PADUA and R.E.N.A.L. scores were 9 (interquartile range, IQR 8–10) and 8 (IQR 6–9), respectively. Of 218 complications in 92 patients (75%), the majority was classified as minor (CDC grade ≤IIIa). Median 30-d CCI® was 8.7 (IQR 0.50–15). There was a small positive correlation between PADUA or R.E.N.A.L. score with CCI® (all P ≤ 0.026), explaining 4.7% and 4.1% of the variation in CCI®, respectively. After adjustment, nephrometry scores were associated with any 30-d complication and the CCI® (all P ≤ 0.011). PADUA and R.E.N.A.L. high complexity tumors were positively associated with both morbidity endpoints compared to low complexity tumors (all P ≤ 0.041).ConclusionsAt a referral center, PN may be safely performed, even if morbidity assessment follows a strict protocol. Nephrometry risk classification does only marginally translate into clinical relevant differences regarding short-term complications. Thus, nephron-sparing surgery should not be withheld from patients with high complexity renal masses.     

Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for sporadic ipsilateral multifocal renal tumours

Study Type – Therapy (case series) Level of Evidence 4 What’s known on the subject? and What does the study add? Although laparoscopic excision of ipsllateral multifocal renal tumours is feasible, the average warm ischemia time is prolonged. Robotic partial nephrectomy in this subset of patients using blunt dissection to enucleate the tumour is feasible and safe. This study demonstrates further that robot‐assisted partial nephrectomy with a small margin of normal tissue is feasible and safe with an acceptable range of warm ischemia time in patients with sporadic ipsilateral multifocal renal tumours. This study also suggest that robotic partial nephrectomy for this particular group of patients may better preserve renal function compared to laparoscopic approach, however this needs to be confirmed with prospective comparative studies.

OBJECTIVE

? To report our short‐term results of robot‐assisted partial nephrectomy for treating sporadic multiple ipsilateral renal tumours.

METHODS

? Over a 3‐year period, eight patients with two or more ipsilateral renal masses underwent nine robotic partial nephrectomies in our institution. ? We evaluated the PADUA and R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry scores, intraoperative outcomes, histopathological characteristics, complications according to Clavien classification and renal function outcomes.

RESULTS

? In total, 19 tumours were removed from eight patients in nine procedures. Mean operative time was 199 ± 47 min (median 200; range 150–300). Mean size of the dominant lesion was 3.0 ± 1.1 cm (2.7; 1.6–4.8) and overall mean tumour size was 2.2 ± 1.2 cm (1.9; 0.4–4.8). Mean number of tumours removed per patient was 2.4. ? Median PADUA and R.E.N.A.L. scores were 7 and 6 (with the predominance of an anterior, non‐hilar position), respectively. ? Excluding the six off‐clamp resected tumours, the mean warm ischaemia time was 21 ± 9.2 min (21; 10–35). Mean estimated blood loss was 250 ± 154 mL (200; 100–500) and no patient required transfusion. There were no intraoperative complications or conversion to open surgery. One patient had atrial fibrillation, resolved with anti‐arrhythmic drugs. Mean length of stay was 4.2 ± 0.97 days. ? Sixteen of the nineteen tumours were malignant, most of papillary type and Fuhrman grade II. ? The mean decrease in glomerular filtration rate was 4%, with a mean follow‐up of 14 months.

CONCLUSIONS

? Robotic partial nephrectomy for sporadic ipsilateral multifocal renal tumours is feasible and safe. ? Off‐clamp resection of multiple tumours can also be safely performed in carefully selected lesions.