...
首页> 外文期刊>European urology >Radiofrequency ablation versus partial nephrectomy in patients with solitary clinical t1a renal cell carcinoma: Comparable oncologic outcomes at a minimum of 5 years of follow-up
【24h】

Radiofrequency ablation versus partial nephrectomy in patients with solitary clinical t1a renal cell carcinoma: Comparable oncologic outcomes at a minimum of 5 years of follow-up

机译:单发临床t1a肾细胞癌患者的射频消融与部分肾切除术:至少随访5年的可比较肿瘤学结果

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: Long-term comparative outcomes for radiofrequency ablation (RFA) versus partial nephrectomy (PN) for the primary treatment of clinical T1a renal cell carcinoma (RCC) have not previously been reported. Objective: Report comparative 5-yr oncologic outcomes for RFA versus PN in patients with clinical T1a RCC. Design, setting, and participants: Observational single-institution cohort study, involving consecutive patients with a solitary histologically confirmed T1a RCC treated by RFA or PN and followed for a minimum of 5 yr. Those presenting with synchronous multiple, metachronous, bilateral, and/or metastatic disease, a history of hereditary RCC syndromes, a family history of RCC, and with post-treatment follow-up <5 yr were excluded from analysis. Measurements: The Kaplan-Meier method was used to determine 5-yr overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), local recurrence-free survival (local RFS), overall disease-free survival (DFS), and metastasis-free survival (MFS) for RFA versus PN. Survival curves were compared using the log-rank test. A p value ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results and limitations: A total of 37 patients in each group met the selection criteria. The RFA cohort was significantly older and had more advanced comorbidities, but other patient characteristics were similar. For RFA versus PN, median follow-up was 6.5 yr (interquartile range [IQR]: 5.8-7.1) versus 6.1 yr (IQR: 5.4-7.3) (p = 0.68), respectively. The 5-yr OS was 97.2% versus 100% (p = 0.31), CSS was 97.2% versus 100% (p = 0.31), DFS was 89.2% versus 89.2% (p = 0.78), local RFS was 91.7% versus 94.6% (p = 0.96), and MFS was 97.2% versus 91.8% (p = 0.35), respectively. Study limitations are retrospective data analysis, loss to follow-up, limited statistical power, and limited generalizability of our data. Conclusions: In appropriately selected patients, RFA is an effective minimally invasive therapy for the treatment of cT1a RCC, yielding comparable long-term oncologic outcomes to nephron-sparing surgery.
机译:背景:射频消融(RFA)与部分肾切除术(PN)在临床T1a肾细胞癌(RCC)一级治疗中的长期比较结果尚未见报道。目的:报告临床T1a RCC患者RFA与PN的5年比较肿瘤学结局。设计,设置和参与者:单机构观察性队列研究,包括经RFA或PN治疗并经组织学证实为T1a RCC的单独患者的连续患者,随访时间至少5年。那些患有同步性多发,异时,双侧和/或转移性疾病,遗传性RCC综合征病史,RCC家族史以及治疗后随访<5年的患者被排除在分析之外。测量:Kaplan-Meier方法用于确定5年总生存期(OS),癌症特异性生存期(CSS),局部无复发生存期(local RFS),总无病生存期(DFS)和转移RFA与PN的免费生存(MFS)。使用对数秩检验比较生存曲线。 p值≤0.05被认为具有统计学意义。结果与局限性:每组共有37名患者符合选择标准。 RFA队列年龄较大,合并症更为严重,但其他患者特征相似。对于RFA与PN,中位随访时间分别为6.5年(四分位间距[IQR]:5.8-7.1)和6.1年(IQR:5.4-7.3)(p = 0.68)。 5年OS为97.2%对100%(p = 0.31),CSS为97.2%对100%(p = 0.31),DFS为89.2%对89.2%(p = 0.78),本地RFS为91.7%对94.6 %(p = 0.96),MFS分别为97.2%和91.8%(p = 0.35)。研究的局限性是回顾性数据分析,随访失败,统计能力有限以及数据的概括性有限。结论:在适当选择的患者中,RFA是治疗cT1a RCC的有效微创疗法,其长期肿瘤学疗效可与保肾术相媲美。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号