703 THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN RENAL TUMOR SCORING SYSTEMS AND PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMY COMPLICATIONS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
You have accessJournal of UrologyKidney Cancer: Evaluation and Staging II1 Apr 2012703 THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN RENAL TUMOR SCORING SYSTEMS AND PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMY COMPLICATIONS Darren J. Desantis, Luke T. Lavallée, Rodney Breau, Fadi Kamal, Brian Blew, James Watterson, Ranjeeta Mallick, Dean Ferguson, Chris Morash, and Ilias Cagiannos Darren J. DesantisDarren J. Desantis Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author , Luke T. LavalléeLuke T. Lavallée Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author , Rodney BreauRodney Breau Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author , Fadi KamalFadi Kamal Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author , Brian BlewBrian Blew Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author , James WattersonJames Watterson Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author , Ranjeeta MallickRanjeeta Mallick Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author , Dean FergusonDean Ferguson Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author , Chris MorashChris Morash Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author , and Ilias CagiannosIlias Cagiannos Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.02.787AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Three renal mass scoring systems have been proposed to quantify difficulty of partial nephrectomy and risk of surgical complications. The objective of this study was to evaluate the associations between each renal tumor scoring system and post-operative complications. METHODS A consecutive cohort of partial nephrectomy patients between 2002-2009 was analyzed. Patient characteristics were abstracted from the medical record and R.E.N.A.L Nephrometry Score, PADUA score and C Index were determined from pre-operative axial images by two independent reviewers. Consensus was achieved for all reviewer discrepancies. Patients were evaluated for post-operative complications up to 30 days following surgery. Pre-specified complication definitions were used for 33 potential complications and severity of each complication was described using the Clavien classification system. Results were analyzed for significance using a Student t-test. RESULTS A total of 118 patients were included in the study. Median R.E.N.A.L. score was 7 (IQR 5-8), median PADUA score was 8 (IQR 7-9.8) and mean C index was 3.9 (SD 2.10). A total of 76 complications were recorded. There were no deaths. There were 18 Grade I, 40 Grade II, 5 Grade IIIa, 4 Grade IIIb and 9 Grade IVa complications. There were no Grade IVb or V complications. Nephrometery score was associated with overall complications (mean score 7.0 vs 6.4, p=0.04) and genitourinary specific complications (mean score 7.7 vs 6.5, p=0.003) respectively. PADUA score was also highly associated with overall (mean 8.8 vs 8.1 p=0.01) and genitourinary specific complications (mean 9.7 vs 8.2, p=0.0002). Mean C index score was not significantly associated with overall or genitourinary specific complications. CONCLUSIONS Renal tumor scoring systems are useful tools to predict risk of complications after partial nephrectomy. Tumor scores should be taken into consideration in the decision making process of partial vs. radical nephrectomy. Prospective studies are required to further evaluate if one scoring system is a superior predictor for surgical complexity. © 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 187Issue 4SApril 2012Page: e288 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Darren J. Desantis Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author Luke T. Lavallée Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author Rodney Breau Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author Fadi Kamal Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author Brian Blew Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author James Watterson Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author Ranjeeta Mallick Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author Dean Ferguson Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author Chris Morash Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author Ilias Cagiannos Ottawa, Canada More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,012 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,025 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».