PD10-12 CLINICAL OUTCOMES FOLLOWING LAPAROSCOPIC MANAGEMENT OF PT3 RENAL MASSES: A MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
You have accessJournal of UrologyKidney Cancer: Evaluation/Staging I1 Apr 2014PD10-12 CLINICAL OUTCOMES FOLLOWING LAPAROSCOPIC MANAGEMENT OF PT3 RENAL MASSES: A MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS Jasmir Nayak, Premal Patel, Kamaljot Kaler, Zhihui Liu, Anil Kapoor, Ricardo Rendon, Simon Tanguay, Peter Black, Jun Kawakami, Rodney Breau, Antonio Finelli, Laurence Klotz, and Darrel Drachenberg Jasmir NayakJasmir Nayak More articles by this author , Premal PatelPremal Patel More articles by this author , Kamaljot KalerKamaljot Kaler More articles by this author , Zhihui LiuZhihui Liu More articles by this author , Anil KapoorAnil Kapoor More articles by this author , Ricardo RendonRicardo Rendon More articles by this author , Simon TanguaySimon Tanguay More articles by this author , Peter BlackPeter Black More articles by this author , Jun KawakamiJun Kawakami More articles by this author , Rodney BreauRodney Breau More articles by this author , Antonio FinelliAntonio Finelli More articles by this author , Laurence KlotzLaurence Klotz More articles by this author , and Darrel DrachenbergDarrel Drachenberg More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.02.488AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Technological advances and improved experience have resulted in advanced renal masses being treated by minimally invasive techniques. We report on the oncological outcomes of patients with non-metastatic renal masses with vascular invasion (pT3) who were treated with laparoscopic nephrectomy (LN) and/or caval thrombectomy. METHODS Institutional databases on patients treated surgically for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) were obtained from 14 centres across 6 Canadian provinces forming the Canadian Kidney Cancer Information System (CKCis) database. Data were collected on 2204 patients and included patient characteristics, peri-operative information, as well as pathological and oncological outcomes. RESULTS Of the 2204 patients, 498 (22.6%) patients had pT3 disease according to the 2009 TNM staging system. 173 (35%) patients underwent laparoscopic management, of which 135 (27%) did not have evidence of metastatic disease at the time of surgery. Mean age was 65 (range 35-88) with a higher propensity of male patients (n=87, 64%). Median tumor size was 6.5 cm (range 1 - 15 cm). The pre-operative clinical stage ranged from cT1-cT4. Average blood loss was 266 ml (range 0-4000 ml) with a mean operative time of 146 minutes (range 73-360 minutes). The majority of lesions were clear cell RCC (68%). Of the pT3 lesions, there were no peri-operative deaths (<30 days). After a median follow-up of 1.4 years, 31 (23%) patients developed metastatic disease, the vast majority being of pulmonary origin (97%). At the end of our follow-up period 130 (96%) patients were alive. CONCLUSIONS For properly selected patients, laparoscopic management of locally advanced renal masses yields acceptable oncological outcomes. Although encouraging, longer follow-up is required to further delineate its role. © 2014FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 191Issue 4SApril 2014Page: e286 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2014MetricsAuthor Information Jasmir Nayak More articles by this author Premal Patel More articles by this author Kamaljot Kaler More articles by this author Zhihui Liu More articles by this author Anil Kapoor More articles by this author Ricardo Rendon More articles by this author Simon Tanguay More articles by this author Peter Black More articles by this author Jun Kawakami More articles by this author Rodney Breau More articles by this author Antonio Finelli More articles by this author Laurence Klotz More articles by this author Darrel Drachenberg 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 | 0,002 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
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 ».