Nephrometry scoring systems: their importance for the planning of nephron-sparing surgery and the relationships among them

Dubeux, Victor Teixeira; Zanier, José Fernando C.; Chantong, Carolina Gianella Cobo; Carrerette, Fabrício Borges; Gabrich, Pedro N.; Damião, Ronaldo

doi:10.1590/0100-3984.2021.0166

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 39 publications

(83 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Kultikov and Uzzo introduced the RENAL nephrometry scoring system in 2009 as a reproducible system to describe renal masses and objectify treatment decision-making (5). The spectrum of use for this system, however, has broadened recently to predict for perioperative complications, functional and pathological outcomes of PN and compare the outcomes of various techniques used like open, laparoscopic and even robotic assisted PN (6,7).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A contrast enhanced CT scan was carried out for each patient and the tumor stage as well as the RENAL nephrometry score (low, moderate, or high) were assigned by a single radiologist according to what is described by Kutikov and Uzzo (5). The treating surgeons were blinded from the nephrometry score assigned for each patient.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kidney and mass anatomy are considered critical factors affecting the outcome of partial nephrectomy, not to mention the surgeon's skills and facilities available (4). In 2009 Kutikov and Uzzo described the RENAL nephrometry score (RNS) to aid choosing the best surgical treatment for renal masses, facilitate the inter-surgeon communication, and standardize case series comparison (5). They built their scoring system on 5 reproducible features of any mass that they considered to affect the mass resection difficulty.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They built their scoring system on 5 reproducible features of any mass that they considered to affect the mass resection difficulty. These parameters are the mass Radius, Edno-and exophyticity, Nearness to the collecting system, being Anterior or posterior, and Location relative to the polar lines (5). Nephrometry scores of 4-6, 7-9, and 10-12 are considered of low, intermediate and high complexity respectively.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Utilizing the R.E.N.A.L Nephrometry Score to predict the Surgical Technique and Peri-operative Outcomes of Renal Masses

Muter,

Khudhair,

Abbas

et al. 2023

Al-Kindy Col. Med. J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: despite the rise in the incidence of renal cell carcinoma attributed to availability of medical imaging, a considerable decline in mortality is an association. Morbidity-wise, the shift from radical nephrectomy to partial nephrectomy is the trend for now. Multiple scoring systems have been introduced over the past decades to help surgeons choose between radical and partial nephrectomy. One commonly used system is the RENAL nephrometry score that was first introduced by Kutikov and Uzzo in 2009. Objective: to evaluate the role of RENAL nephrometry scoring system in predicting the surgical technique to use to resect renal masses and associated perioperative outcomes. Subjects and methods: between December 2018 and December 2020, we prospectively recruited 88 patients with renal masses. Nephrometry scores of all patients were calculated by an experienced radiologist and a decision then was made by blinded treating surgeons to proceed to radical or partial nephrectomy. Patients then sub-grouped into low, moderate, and high nephrometry scores, and into radical and partial nephrectomy. Pre-, intra-, and post-operative data were collected and analyzed. Results: Eighty-three patients completed the study. Thirty-three had undergone radical nephrectomy and 50 had partial nephrectomy. Total nephrometry score differed significantly between the two groups. Mass radius and nearness to the renal hilum were the only influential components. The only complication that differed significantly among the three nephrometry groups was the estimated blood loss, being highest in the low complexity group. No significant difference was found in the total operation time, ischemia time, renal function and hospital stay. Major complications were seen only in the high complexity group. Conclusion: Total nephrometry score, mass radius and nearness to renal hilum can be regarded as good and reproducible predictors of type of surgery required to treat renal masses. They also can predict the perioperative complication to a good extent.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Utilizing the R.E.N.A.L Nephrometry Score to predict the Surgical Technique and Peri-operative Outcomes of Renal Masses

Muter,

Khudhair,

Abbas

et al. 2023

Al-Kindy Col. Med. J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Interobserver reproducibility of RENAL nephrometry score in comparison to simplified PADUA Renal nephrometry score

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Nephron-sparing surgery (NSS) is the standard of care for renal tumors, especially in the early stages. RENAL Nephrometry scores provide a comprehensive presurgical predictive module for the choice of NSS or Radical Nephrectomy. The validity and reliability of Nephrometry scores is being tested continuously with advancement in the surgical techniques. The Simplified PADUA Nephrometry score (SPARE NS) is a newer proposed score which aims to better the reproducibility of the previously established nephrometry scores. Materials and Methods: The retrospective observational study studied the comparative inter-observer reliability of RENAL (RENAL NS) and SPARE nephrometry scoring systems amongst two radiologists while assessing solid renal tumors in contrast-enhanced computed tomography scans of 42 patients. Interobserver reliability for all components of both scores, final scores and risk grading was done by Kendall’s Concordance Coefficient (Tau). Results: Both RENAL NS and SPARE NS showed strong to excellent agreement (RENAL NS = 78.57% and SPARE NS = 88.09%) among observers with comparable correlation co-efficient (RENAL NS = 0.944 and SPARE NS = 0.935). Lesion radius and exophytic/endophytic properties were the most reproducible components of RENAL NS with 97.61% and 92.85% agreement, respectively. Location across polar lines was the least reproducible component with 85.71% agreement among observers. Exophytic rate (97.61%) and Rim location were the most reproducible components of SPARE NS. The final lesion risk stratification by both observers for both was concordant in 92.85% of cases. Conclusion: The SPARE system of scoring matches up to the RENAL NS in total score and risk stratification reproducibility. However, the individual components of the SPARE score are more reproducible than those of RENAL NS, bringing about better compliance among radiology consultants. Comparable reproducibility with the RENAL NS, lesser number of variables, and ease of doing make SPARE NS a plausible option for the customary preoperative assessment of renal tumors.

show abstract

Nephrometry scoring systems: their importance for the planning of nephron-sparing surgery and the relationships among them

Cited by 2 publications

References 39 publications

Utilizing the R.E.N.A.L Nephrometry Score to predict the Surgical Technique and Peri-operative Outcomes of Renal Masses

Utilizing the R.E.N.A.L Nephrometry Score to predict the Surgical Technique and Peri-operative Outcomes of Renal Masses

Interobserver reproducibility of RENAL nephrometry score in comparison to simplified PADUA Renal nephrometry score

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About