Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Eur Urol Oncol. 2018 Oct;1(5):428-434. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.05.004. Epub 2018 May 30.
Several standardized scoring systems are used to quantify renal tumor complexity on the basis of anatomic features to predict perioperative and postoperative outcomes of partial nephrectomy (PN).
To compare the predictive accuracy and utility of the Arterial Based Complexity (ABC), RENAL, and PADUA scores.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Between January 2013 and March 2016, 304 patients at our institution underwent PN plus complete triphasic contrast computed tomography (CT) scans. Two urologists independently scored CT images to retrospectively evaluate each patient using the ABC, RENAL, and PADUA nephrometry scoring systems.
Interobserver variability was reported for each of the three nephrometry scores; κ=1 represented perfect agreement between the two urologists and κ=0 represented as much agreement as expected by chance. Univariate and multivariable linear regression models were used to investigate associations of the nephrometry scores with estimated blood loss (EBL), ischemia time, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at 18 mo. Coefficients of determination (R) were compared to determine which nephrometry score accounted for the most variation in outcome.
The κ value was 0.52 for ABC, 0.53 for RENAL, and 0.63 for PADUA (all p≤0.001). On univariate analysis, there were no significant associations between nephrometry scores and postoperative eGFR; all three scores were highly associated with ischemia time (p<0.0001) and EBL (p≤0.001). R was not significantly different among the three scoring systems. On multivariable analysis, all three nephrometry scores were significantly associated with ischemia time (p<0.0001) and EBL (p≤0.01); only the RENAL score was associated with postoperative eGFR (p=0.044), so its performance on this metric could not be compared to that of ABC or PADUA.
The ABC, RENAL, and PADUA systems have similar performance for predicting EBL and ischemia time outcomes in PN, and are thus equally useful for assessing PN complexity. Further education and training are needed to reduce interobserver variability.
A new score system called Arterial Based Complexity (ABC) can be used to evaluate the complexity of a renal tumor and predict how difficult the tumor resection (partial nephrectomy) may be. This system performs well compared to other established systems and seems easy to learn and use.
有几种标准化的评分系统用于根据解剖特征量化肾肿瘤的复杂性,以预测部分肾切除术(PN)的围手术期和术后结果。
比较动脉基础复杂性(ABC)、RENAL 和 PADUA 评分的预测准确性和实用性。
设计、地点和参与者:2013 年 1 月至 2016 年 3 月期间,我院 304 例患者接受 PN 加完全三期对比 CT 扫描。两位泌尿科医生独立对 CT 图像进行评分,使用 ABC、RENAL 和 PADUA 肾脏评分系统回顾性评估每位患者。
报告了三种肾脏评分的观察者间变异性;κ=1 表示两位泌尿科医生之间的完全一致,κ=0 表示与随机一致的一致性。单变量和多变量线性回归模型用于研究肾脏评分与估计失血量(EBL)、缺血时间和 18 个月时估计肾小球滤过率(eGFR)之间的关联。决定系数(R)进行比较,以确定哪种肾脏评分对结果的变化影响最大。
ABC 的κ值为 0.52,RENAL 的κ值为 0.53,PADUA 的κ值为 0.63(均 p≤0.001)。单变量分析显示,肾脏评分与术后 eGFR 无显著相关性;所有三个评分均与缺血时间(p<0.0001)和 EBL(p≤0.001)高度相关。三个评分系统之间的 R 无显著差异。多变量分析显示,所有三种肾脏评分均与缺血时间(p<0.0001)和 EBL(p≤0.01)显著相关;只有 RENAL 评分与术后 eGFR 相关(p=0.044),因此无法将其与 ABC 或 PADUA 的性能进行比较。
ABC、RENAL 和 PADUA 系统在预测 PN 中 EBL 和缺血时间结果方面具有相似的性能,因此对于评估 PN 复杂性同样有用。需要进一步的教育和培训来减少观察者间的变异性。
一种名为动脉基础复杂性(ABC)的新评分系统可用于评估肾肿瘤的复杂性,并预测肿瘤切除(部分肾切除术)的难度。与其他既定系统相比,该系统表现良好,并且易于学习和使用。