Is Ablation Suitable For Small Renal Masses? A Meta-Analysis

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Academic Radiology Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.acra.2024.08.007
Si Ge , Zuoping Wang , Yunxiang Li MD. , Lei Zheng , Lijian Gan , Zhiqiang Zeng , Chunyang Meng , Kangsen Li , Jiakai Ma , Deyu Wang , Yuan Ren
{"title":"Is Ablation Suitable For Small Renal Masses? A Meta-Analysis","authors":"Si Ge ,&nbsp;Zuoping Wang ,&nbsp;Yunxiang Li MD. ,&nbsp;Lei Zheng ,&nbsp;Lijian Gan ,&nbsp;Zhiqiang Zeng ,&nbsp;Chunyang Meng ,&nbsp;Kangsen Li ,&nbsp;Jiakai Ma ,&nbsp;Deyu Wang ,&nbsp;Yuan Ren","doi":"10.1016/j.acra.2024.08.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Rationale and Objectives</h3><div>To compare perioperative and oncology outcomes of ablation and partial nephrectomy in small renal masses (SRMs).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conduct this meta-analysis strictly according to the PRISMA standard, and the quality evaluation follows the AMSTAR standard. Four databases, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, were systematically searched. The search time range is from database creation to November 2023. Stata16 statistical software was used for statistical analysis. Weighted mean difference (WMD) represented continuity variables, odds ratio or relative risk (OR/RR) represented dichotomies variables, and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were calculated.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 27 studies, including 6030 patients. Results showed that patients undergoing partial nephrectomy were younger (WMD = −5.45 years, 95%CI [−7.44, −3.46], P &lt; 0.05), had longer operation time (WMD = 64.91 min, 95%CI [44.47, 85.34], P &lt; 0.05), had longer length of stay (WMD = 2.91 days, 95%CI [2.04, 3.78], P &lt; 0.05), and had more estimated blood loss (WMD = 97.76 ml, 95%CI [69.48, 126.04]. P &lt; 0.05), the overall complication rate was higher (OR = 1.84, 95%CI [1.48, 2.29], P &lt; 0.05), the major complication rate was higher (OR = 1.98, 95%CI [1.36, 2.88], P &lt; 0.05), and the recurrence rate was lower (OR = 0.32, 95%Cl [0.20, 0.50], P &lt; 0.05). However, there were no differences between ablation and partial nephrectomy in cancer-specific survival (CSS) (HR = 2.07, 95%CI [0.61, 7.04], P &gt; 0.05), overall survival (OS) (HR = 1.24, 95%CI [0.58, 2.65], P &gt; 0.05), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR = 2.68, 95%CI [0.91, 7.88], P &gt; 0.05).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Patients undergoing partial nephrectomy are younger, have longer operation time and length of stay, and have higher complication rate. However, there was no significant difference in CSS, OS, and RFS between partial nephrectomy and ablation, but more well-designed, high-quality studies are needed to confirm this.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50928,"journal":{"name":"Academic Radiology","volume":"32 1","pages":"Pages 218-235"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1076633224005701","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Rationale and Objectives

To compare perioperative and oncology outcomes of ablation and partial nephrectomy in small renal masses (SRMs).

Methods

We conduct this meta-analysis strictly according to the PRISMA standard, and the quality evaluation follows the AMSTAR standard. Four databases, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, were systematically searched. The search time range is from database creation to November 2023. Stata16 statistical software was used for statistical analysis. Weighted mean difference (WMD) represented continuity variables, odds ratio or relative risk (OR/RR) represented dichotomies variables, and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were calculated.

Results

A total of 27 studies, including 6030 patients. Results showed that patients undergoing partial nephrectomy were younger (WMD = −5.45 years, 95%CI [−7.44, −3.46], P < 0.05), had longer operation time (WMD = 64.91 min, 95%CI [44.47, 85.34], P < 0.05), had longer length of stay (WMD = 2.91 days, 95%CI [2.04, 3.78], P < 0.05), and had more estimated blood loss (WMD = 97.76 ml, 95%CI [69.48, 126.04]. P < 0.05), the overall complication rate was higher (OR = 1.84, 95%CI [1.48, 2.29], P < 0.05), the major complication rate was higher (OR = 1.98, 95%CI [1.36, 2.88], P < 0.05), and the recurrence rate was lower (OR = 0.32, 95%Cl [0.20, 0.50], P < 0.05). However, there were no differences between ablation and partial nephrectomy in cancer-specific survival (CSS) (HR = 2.07, 95%CI [0.61, 7.04], P > 0.05), overall survival (OS) (HR = 1.24, 95%CI [0.58, 2.65], P > 0.05), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR = 2.68, 95%CI [0.91, 7.88], P > 0.05).

Conclusion

Patients undergoing partial nephrectomy are younger, have longer operation time and length of stay, and have higher complication rate. However, there was no significant difference in CSS, OS, and RFS between partial nephrectomy and ablation, but more well-designed, high-quality studies are needed to confirm this.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
消融术是否适用于肾脏小肿块(SRM)?一项 Meta 分析。
理论依据和目标:比较小肾肿块(SRMs)消融术和肾部分切除术的围手术期和肿瘤学结果:我们严格按照 PRISMA 标准进行荟萃分析,并按照 AMSTAR 标准进行质量评估。我们系统地检索了 Embase、PubMed、Cochrane Library 和 Web of Science 四个数据库。检索时间范围为数据库创建至 2023 年 11 月。统计分析使用 Stata16 统计软件。加权平均差(WMD)代表连续变量,几率比或相对风险(OR/RR)代表二分变量,并计算出95%置信区间(95%CI):共有 27 项研究,包括 6030 名患者。结果显示,接受肾部分切除术的患者更年轻(WMD = -5.45岁,95%CI [-7.44, -3.46],P 0.05),总生存期(OS)(HR = 1.24,95%CI [0.58, 2.65],P > 0.05)和无复发生存期(RFS)(HR = 2.68,95%CI [0.91, 7.88],P > 0.05):结论:接受肾部分切除术的患者更年轻,手术时间和住院时间更长,并发症发生率更高。然而,肾部分切除术与消融术在CSS、OS和RFS方面没有明显差异,但需要更多设计良好、高质量的研究来证实这一点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Academic Radiology
Academic Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
10.40%
发文量
432
审稿时长
18 days
期刊介绍: Academic Radiology publishes original reports of clinical and laboratory investigations in diagnostic imaging, the diagnostic use of radioactive isotopes, computed tomography, positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, digital subtraction angiography, image-guided interventions and related techniques. It also includes brief technical reports describing original observations, techniques, and instrumental developments; state-of-the-art reports on clinical issues, new technology and other topics of current medical importance; meta-analyses; scientific studies and opinions on radiologic education; and letters to the Editor.
期刊最新文献
How to Succeed on Your Residency Interview Abnormal Functional Attributes of Central Executive Network in Patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment Associated with End-Stage Renal Disease Enhancing Outcome Prediction in Intracerebral Hemorrhage Through Deep Learning: A Retrospective Multicenter Study Advances in spatial resolution and radiation dose reduction using super-resolution deep learning–based reconstruction for abdominal computed tomography: A phantom study Diffusion Weighted Imaging for the Assessment of Lymph Node Metastases in Women with Cervical Cancer: A Meta-analysis of the Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1