BackgroundTo evaluate the clinical usefulness of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) divided by functional renal volume (FRV) measured by three-dimensional image reconstruction (eGFR/FRV) for the prediction of functional outcomes after nephrectomy.MethodsEighty-three patients who underwent nephrectomy were enrolled. The FRV of each patient was measured before surgery. Preoperative medical information on proteinuria, blood pressure, blood glucose level, body mass index (BMI), hemoglobin level and serum cholesterol level were also obtained. We evaluated the relationships between eGFR/FRV and each of these parameters before surgery. We also assessed the potential relationship between eGFR/FRV and the 3-year postoperative eGFR. Stepwise multiple regression analyses were conducted to elucidate independent factors.ResultsThe median FRV and eGFR were 310.15 cm3 and 79.0 ml/min/1.73 m2 before surgery, respectively. The correlation between FRV and eGFR was statistically significant (r = 0.465, P < 0.001). The median eGFR/FRV was 0.24 ml/min/1.73 m2/cm3. Stepwise multiple regression analysis showed that the independent parameters (multiple correlation coefficient, r = 0.389, P = 0.031) associated with eGFR/FRV were proteinuria, BMI, age and hypertension. Proteinuria was statistically associated with eGFR/FRV, and the independent parameters (multiple correlation coefficient, r = 0.694, P < 0.001) associated with the 3-year postoperative eGFR were age, BMI and eGFR/FRV. The eGFR/FRV was statistically associated with the 3-year postoperative eGFR (r = 0.559, P < 0.001).ConclusionThe present results demonstrated that patients with proteinuria are expected to have a lower eGFR/FRV than those without proteinuria. The present study also supports the notion that eGFR/FRV is the primary determinant of the long-term functional outcome after nephrectomy. It should be taken into consideration that patients with a low eGFR/FRV may develop chronic kidney disease after nephrectomy.
The postoperative FRV and renal function could be predicted preoperatively using a 3-D image reconstructive system, preoperative routine diagnostic imaging, and preoperative sCr level.
The objectives of this study were to evaluate dosimetric quality and acute toxicity of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and daily image guidance in high-risk prostate cancer patients. A total of 100 consecutive high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with definitive VMAT with prophylactic whole-pelvic radiotherapy (WPRT) were enrolled. All patients were treated with a double-arc VMAT plan delivering 52 Gy to the prostate planning target volume (PTV), while simultaneously delivering 46.8 Gy to the pelvic nodal PTV in 26 fractions, followed by a single-arc VMAT plan delivering 26 Gy to the prostate PTV in 13 fractions. Image-guided RT was performed with daily cone-beam computed tomography. Dose–volume parameters for the PTV and the organs at risk (OARs), total number of monitor units (MUs) and treatment time were evaluated. Acute toxicity was assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. All dosimetric parameters met the present plan acceptance criteria. Mean MU and treatment time were 471 and 146 s for double-arc VMAT, respectively, and were 520 and 76 s for single-arc VMAT, respectively. No Grade 3 or higher acute toxicity was reported. Acute Grade 2 proctitis, diarrhea, and genitourinary toxicity occurred in 12 patients (12%), 6 patients (6%) and 13 patients (13%), respectively. The present study demonstrated that VMAT for WPRT in prostate cancer results in favorable PTV coverage and OAR sparing with short treatment time and an acceptable rate of acute toxicity. These findings support the use of VMAT for delivering WPRT to high-risk prostate cancer patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.