Nontargeted Native Renal Biopsy Adequacy: Preintervention Data From a Province-Wide, Multicentre, and Interdepartmental Audit
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Nontargeted renal biopsy is essential to diagnosis, classification, and prognostication of medical renal disease. Inadequate biopsies delay diagnosis, expose the patient to repeated biopsy, and increase costs. Objective: The purpose of this project is to characterize nontargeted renal biopsy specimen adequacy and identify areas for improvement. Design: This project was designed as a clinical audit of specimen adequacy rates of nontargeted renal biopsies from 13 hospitals, as well as a questionnaire of radiology and pathology department staff regarding current practices surrounding renal biopsies. Setting: Retrospective analysis of 2188 adult native renal biopsies was performed from January 1, 2018, to September 9, 2021, across 13 hospitals. Patients: Adult patients with medical renal disease undergoing a nontargeted renal biopsy were included. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 2188 adult native renal biopsies was performed from January 1, 2018, to September 9, 2021, across 13 hospitals. Adequacy was divided into 4 categories based on number of glomeruli received: ideally adequate (≥25 glomeruli), minimally adequate (15-24), suboptimal (<15 and diagnosis rendered), and inadequate (<15 and no diagnosis rendered). Two targets were chosen; target 1, to achieve a combined suboptimal and inadequate rate ≤ 10%, and target 2, to attain an ideally adequate rate ≥80%. Radiology department heads in the province were surveyed on biopsy equipment, technique, technologist support, and feasibility of possible interventions to enhance biopsy adequacy. Pathology department staff were surveyed on their education and experience. Results: Adequacy was as follows: ideally adequate 64.7%, minimally adequate 26.0%, suboptimal 7.9%, and inadequate 1.4%. The province (and 8/13 hospitals) met target 1 for native biopsies (9.3%). Two hospitals achieved target 2 for native biopsies. A key finding was that the 2 hospitals with the lowest target 1 scores did not have a technologist present at biopsy. Limitations: Survey data was used to assess biopsy technique at each hospital, and specific technique for each biopsy was not recorded. As such, a multivariate statistical analysis of specimen adequacy rates was not feasible. Data on complications was not collected. Conclusions: Preintervention the province was at target for limiting inadequate and suboptimal native biopsies. There was a substantial shortfall in the ideally adequate rate from the proposed target. Using insight from survey data, interventions with the greatest expected impact were identified and those that are feasible given limited resources will be implemented to improve sample adequacy. Trial Registration: Not registered.
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 | 0,006 | 0,022 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
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 ».