Purely Off-Clamp Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy Stands the Test of Time: 15 Years Functional and Oncologic Outcomes from a Single Center Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Nephron-sparing surgery represents the gold standard treatment for organ-confined renal tumors. We present 15-years of outcomes after off-clamp laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (ocLPN). Methods: a retrospective analysis was performed on patients who underwent ocLPN between May 2001 and December 2005. Baseline demographic, clinical, pathologic, surgical, functional and survival data were collected. The Kaplan–Meier method evaluated group-specific oncologic outcomes at 5, 10 and 15 years and the log rank test assessed differences between groups. The same analysis investigated the probabilities of developing a significant renal function impairment (sRFI) and achieving ROMeS. Cox analyses identified predictors of this latter tricomposite outcome. Results: We included 63 patients whose median tumor size was 3 cm (IQR:2–4). At 15 years, the chances of developing local recurrence, metachronous renal cancers or distant metastases were 2 ± 2%, 23 ± 6% and 17 ± 5%, respectively. Consequently, disease-free, cancer-specific and overall-survival probabilities were 68 ± 6%, 90 ± 4% and 72 ± 6%. MCRSS and UCISS well predicted oncologic outcomes. Overall, nine (14%) patients experienced an sRFI and 33 (52%) achieved ROMeS. Age (HR: 1.046; p = 0.033) and malignant histology (low-risk cancers HR: 3.233, p = 0.048) (intermediate/high risk cancers HR: 5.721, p = 0.023) were independent predictors of ROMeS non-achievement. Conclusions: At 15 years from ocLPN, most of patients will experience both excellent functional and oncologic outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".