Journal of Jilin University(Medicine Edition) ›› 2023, Vol. 49 ›› Issue (6): 1569-1577.doi: 10.13481/j.1671-587X.20230621
• Research in clinical medicine • Previous Articles Next Articles
Senqiang ZHU,Yuanyuan HAO,Ran BI,Chunxi WANG,Jinghai HU(
)
Received:2023-02-21
Online:2023-11-28
Published:2023-12-22
Contact:
Jinghai HU
E-mail:jinghaihu206@sohu.com
CLC Number:
Senqiang ZHU,Yuanyuan HAO,Ran BI,Chunxi WANG,Jinghai HU. Analysis on influencing factors of renal function preservation and trifecta outcomes of patients after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy[J].Journal of Jilin University(Medicine Edition), 2023, 49(6): 1569-1577.
Tab.1
Univariate analysis on influencing factors of trifecta outcomes and 24 h eGFR decreasing >10% of patients after RAPN"
| Variable | Trifecta | P | Postoperative 24 h eGFR decreasing>10% | P | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes(n=73) | No(n=38) | Yes(n=26) | No(n=85) | |||
| Age (year) | 55.36±10.72 | 51.16±10.05 | 0.048 | 52.12±11.55 | 54.47±10.35 | 0.325 |
| Gender [n(η/%)] | ||||||
| Male | 50(68.5) | 30(78.9) | 0.244 | 22(84.6) | 58(68.2) | 0.103 |
| Female | 23(31.5) | 8(21.1) | 4(15.4) | 27(31.8) | ||
| ASA [n(η/%)] | ||||||
| 1 | 1(1.4) | 4(10.5) | 0.058 | 2(7.7) | 3(3.5) | 0.665 |
| 2 | 64(87.7) | 28(73.7) | 21(80.8) | 71(83.5) | ||
| 3 | 8(11.0) | 6(15.8) | 3(11.5) | 11(12.9) | ||
| BMI(kg·m-2) | 25.19±2.89 | 26.09±3.07 | 0.128 | 25.95±3.10 | 25.36±2.93 | 0.373 |
| Hypertension[n(η/%)] | ||||||
| Yes | 24(32.9) | 5(13.2) | 0.025 | 7(26.9) | 22(25.9) | 0.916 |
| No | 49(67.1) | 33(86.8) | 19(73.1) | 63(74.1) | ||
| Diabetes[n(η/%)] | ||||||
| Yes | 20(27.4) | 8(21.1) | 0.465 | 3(11.5) | 25(29.4) | 0.066 |
| No | 53(72.6) | 30(78.9) | 23(88.5) | 60(70.6) | ||
| Preoperative eGFR (mL·min-1·1.73m-2) | 94.11±12.55 | 95.34±13.69 | 0.637 | 92.20±14.36 | 95.25±12.43 | 0.294 |
| Postoperative 24 h eGFR change(η/%) | -0.17 (-6.84,4.60) | -5.96 (-17.58,1.37) | <0.01 | -19.03 (-29.17,-14.82) | 1.09 (-4.36,5.50) | <0.01 |
| Hilar tumor[n(η/%)] | ||||||
| Yes | 5(6.8) | 2(5.3) | 0.744 | 2(7.7) | 5(5.9) | 0.740 |
| No | 68(93.2) | 36(94.7) | 24(92.3) | 80(94.1) | ||
| Variable | Trifecta | P | Postoperative 24 h eGFR decreasing>10% | P | ||
| Yes(n=73) | No(n=38) | Yes(n=26) | No(n=85) | |||
| Dorsal ventral position of tumor[n(η/%)] | ||||||
| Nterior | 28(38.4) | 16(42.1) | 0.896 | 10(38.5) | 34(40.0) | 0.740 |
| Posterior | 25(34.2) | 13(34.2) | 9(34.6) | 29(34.1) | ||
| Undefined | 20(27.4) | 9(23.7) | 7(26.9) | 22(25.9) | ||
| Tumor maximum diameter(l/cm) | 2.88±1.06 | 3.84±1.66 | <0.01 | 4.02±1.18 | 2.97±1.33 | <0.01 |
| RENAL | 6(5,8) | 8(7,9) | <0.01 | 8(6,9) | 7(6,8) | 0.049 |
| PADUA | 8(7.5,9.5) | 10(9,11) | <0.01 | 10(8.75,11.00) | 9(8,10) | 0.016 |
| C-index | 2.63(2.01,3.61) | 1.56(1.25,2.43) | <0.01 | 1.64(1.21,2.31) | 2.52(1.84,3.51) | <0.01 |
| RTII | 0.72(0.56,0.94) | 0.92(0.72,1.46) | <0.01 | 1.07(0.70,1.59) | 0.76(0.61,0.95) | <0.01 |
| CSA(S/cm2) | 15.28 (7.10,25.91) | 24.74 (17.14,36.67) | <0.01 | 27.41 (18.57,49.04) | 16.57(7.92,26.30) | <0.01 |
| Surgical approach [n(η/%)] | ||||||
| Abdominal | 22(30.1) | 12(31.6) | 0.876 | 6(23.1) | 28(32.9) | 0.340 |
| Retroperitoneal | 51(69.9) | 26(68.4) | <0.01 | 20(76.9) | 57(67.1) | 0.003 |
| WIT (t/min) | 18(15.00,20.00) | 28(25.00,32.50) | 25(20.00,30.25) | 20 (16.00,24.00) | ||
| EBL (V/mL) | 50(20,100) | 100(50,300) | <0.01 | 100(50,200) | 50(20,100) | <0.01 |
| Histology type[n(η/%)] | ||||||
| Clear cell | 65(89.0) | 35(92.1) | 0.848 | 22(84.6) | 78(91.8) | 0.560 |
| Papillary | 2(2.7) | 1(2.6) | 1(3.8) | 2(2.4) | ||
| Chromophobe | 6(8.2) | 2(5.3) | 3(11.5) | 5(5.9) | ||
| Tumor TNM stage[n(η/%)] | ||||||
| T1a | 63(86.3) | 27(71.1) | 0.052 | 16(61.5) | 74(87.1) | <0.01 |
| Non-T1a | 10(13.7) | 11(28.9) | 10(38.5) | 11(12.9) | ||
Tab.2
Univariate analysis on influencing factors of postoperative 24 h eGFR changes of RAPN patients"
| Variable | B | 95%CI | P |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 0.008 | -0.249-0.266 | 0.950 |
| Gender | 2.403 | -3.662-8.468 | 0.434 |
| ASA | -1.990 | -8.705-4.725 | 0.558 |
| BMI | 0.033 | -0.889-0.956 | 0.943 |
| Hypertension | -0.903 | -7.112-5.306 | 0.774 |
| Diabetes | -4.347 | -10.575-1.882 | 0.169 |
| Preoperative eGFR | -0.100 | -0.311-0.112 | 0.353 |
| Tumor maximum diameter | -3.630 | -5.515--1.746 | <0.01 |
| Hilar tumor | 1.936 | -9.284-13.156 | 0.733 |
| Nterior vs posterior | -1.596 | -4.995-1.804 | 0.354 |
| Nterior vs undefined | 2.729 | -4.115-9.572 | 0.431 |
| Posterior vs undefined | -1.833 | -8.887-5.222 | 0.608 |
| RENAL | -1.959 | -3.535--0.382 | 0.015 |
| PADUA | -2.882 | -4.617--1.146 | <0.01 |
| C-index | 3.205 | 1.666-4.744 | <0.01 |
| RTII | -12.364 | -17.991--6.737 | <0.01 |
| CSA | -0.312 | -0.456--0.168 | <0.01 |
| Surgical approach | -0.788 | -6.706-5.130 | 0.792 |
| WIT | -0.553 | -0.888--0.218 | <0.01 |
| EBL | -0.004 | -0.015-0.007 | 0.473 |
| Histology | -1.395 | -6.490-3.701 | 0.589 |
| Papillary vs clear cell | -4.689 | -21.578-12.201 | 0.583 |
| Chromophobe vs clear cell | -2.230 | -12.821-8.361 | 0.677 |
| Tumor TNM stage | -9.529 | -16.257--2.800 | <0.01 |
Tab.3
Multivariate Logistic regression analysis on influencing factors of postoperative trifecta outcomes of RAPN patients"
| Variable | B | OR | 95%CI | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | -0.024 | 0.977 | 0.922-1.034 | 0.416 |
| Hypertension | -0.536 | 0.585 | 0.147-2.335 | 0.448 |
| Tumor maximum diameter | 0.026 | 1.026 | 0.654-1.611 | 0.911 |
| RENAL | 0.248 | 1.282 | 0.720-2.283 | 0.399 |
| PADUA | 0.091 | 1.095 | 0.561-2.140 | 0.790 |
| C-index | -0.718 | 0.488 | 0.217-1.096 | 0.082 |
| RTII | 0.615 | 1.849 | 0.346-9.881 | 0.472 |
| EBL | 0.006 | 1.006 | 1.001-1.011 | 0.020 |
Tab.4
Multivariate Logistc regression analysis on influencing factors of postoperative 24 h eGFR decreasing>10% of RAPN patients"
| Variable | B | OR | 95%CI | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tumor maximum diameter | 0.093 | 1.098 | 0.657-1.833 | 0.722 |
| RENAL | -0.261 | 0.770 | 0.440-1.348 | 0.361 |
| PADUA | -0.030 | 0.970 | 0.507-1.858 | 0.927 |
| C-index | -0.698 | 0.498 | 0.220-1.127 | 0.094 |
| RTII | 1.491 | 4.442 | 1.049-18.806 | 0.043 |
| WIT | 0.032 | 1.033 | 0.949-1.123 | 0.453 |
| EBL | -0.001 | 0.999 | 0.996-1.002 | 0.455 |
| Tumor TNM stage | -0.532 | 0.587 | 0.123-2.792 | 0.503 |
Tab.5
Multivariate linear regression analysis on influencing factors of postoperative 24 h eGFR changes of RAPN patients"
| Variable | B | SE | β | P | 95%CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tumor maximum diameter | -0.757 | 1.400 | -0.072 | 0.590 | -3.534-2.020 |
| RENAL | 1.742 | 1.381 | 0.204 | 0.210 | -0.997-4.480 |
| PADUA | -1.518 | 1.594 | -0.158 | 0.343 | -4.680-1.643 |
| C-index | 1.733 | 1.023 | 0.199 | 0.093 | -0.295-3.762 |
| RTII | -7.204 | 3.581 | -0.224 | 0.047 | -14.305--0.102 |
| WIT | -0.131 | 0.197 | -0.071 | 0.507 | -0.522-0.260 |
| Tumor TNM stage | -2.507 | 4.171 | -0.068 | 0.549 | -10.780-5.766 |
| 1 | 黄 健, 王建业, 孔垂泽, 等. 中国泌尿外科和男科疾病诊断治疗指南 [M]. 北京: 科学出版社,2020:2. |
| 2 | LEIBOVICH B C, BLUTE M L, CHEVILLE J C,et al. Nephron sparing surgery for appropriately selected renal cell carcinoma between 4 and 7 cm results in outcome similar to radical nephrectomy [J]. J Urol, 2004, 171(3): 1066-1070. |
| 3 | HUNG A J, CAI J, SIMMONS M N, et al. “Trifecta” in Partial Nephrectomy [J].J Urol, 2013,189(1):36-42. |
| 4 | JUNKER T, DUUS L, RASMUSSEN B S B, et al. Quality of life and complications after nephron-sparing treatment of renal cell carcinoma stage T1-a systematic review [J]. Syst Rev, 2022, 11(1): 4. |
| 5 | XIAO Y, SHAN Z J, YANG J F, et al. Nephrometric scoring system: Recent advances and outlooks [J]. Urol Oncol, 2023, 41(1): 15-26. |
| 6 | CHOUDHARY G R, JENA R, LIKHITESWER P, et al. Patient renal and tumor attribute score (PRETA Score): a comprehensive renal nephrometry score for use in patients with renal masses planned for minimally invasive nephron sparing surgery [J]. J Robot Surg, 2022, 16(6): 1463-1470. |
| 7 | KUTIKOV A, UZZO R G. The R E N A L nephrometry score: a comprehensive standardized system for quantitating renal tumor size, location and depth [J]. J Urol, 2009, 182(3): 844-853. |
| 8 | FICARRA V, NOVARA G, SECCO S, et al. Preoperative aspects and dimensions used for an anatomical (PADUA) classification of renal tumours in patients who are candidates for nephron-sparing surgery [J]. Eur Urol, 2009, 56(5): 786-793. |
| 9 | SIMMONS M N, CHING C B, SAMPLASKI M K, et al. Kidney tumor location measurement using the C index method [J]. J Urol, 2010, 183(5): 1708-1713. |
| 10 | NISEN H, RUUTU M, GLUCKER E, et al. Renal tumour invasion index as a novel anatomical classification predicting urological complications after partial nephrectomy [J]. Scand J Urol, 2014, 48(1): 41-51. |
| 11 | LESLIE S, GILL I S, DE CASTRO ABREU A L,et al. Renal tumor contact surface area: a novel parameter for predicting complexity and outcomes of partial nephrectomy [J].Eur Urol,2014,66(5): 884-893. |
| 12 | ALVIM R G, TIN A L, NOGUEIRA L, et al. Functional and oncological outcomes of renal surgery for hilar tumors: informing the decisions in risk-adapted management [J]. Urology, 2021, 157: 174-180. |
| 13 | KOPP R P, MEHRAZIN R, PALAZZI K L, et al. Survival outcomes after radical and partial nephrectomy for clinical T2 renal tumours categorised by R E N A L nephrometry score [J]. BJU Int,2014,114(5): 708-718. |
| 14 | MAURICE M J, RAMIREZ D, KARA O, et al. Optimum outcome achievement in partial nephrectomy for T1 renal masses: a contemporary analysis of open and robot-assisted cases [J]. BJU Int, 2017, 120(4): 537-543. |
| 15 | PORTER J, BLAU E. Robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy: evolving techniques and expanding considerations [J]. Curr Opin Urol, 2020,30(1): 79-82. |
| 16 | SHARMA G, SHARMA A P, TYAGI S, et al. Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for moderate to highly complex renal masses. A systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. Indian J Urol, 2022, 38(3): 174-183. |
| 17 | TANAKA H, WANG Y, SUK-OUICHAI C, et al. Can we predict functional outcomes after partial nephrectomy? [J]. J Urol, 2019, 201(4): 693-701. |
| 18 | ISHARWAL S, YE W, WANG A, et al. Impact of comorbidities on functional recovery from partial nephrectomy [J]. J Urol, 2018, 199(6): 1433-1439. |
| 19 | BEKSAC A T, OKHAWERE K E, ELBAKRY A A, et al. Management of high complexity renal masses in partial nephrectomy: A multicenter analysis [J]. Urol Oncol, 2019, 37(7): 437-444. |
| 20 | OHSUGI H, AKIYAMA K, TANIGUCHI H, et al. Tumor volume and tumor crossing of the axial renal midline predict renal function after robotic partial nephrectomy [J]. Sci Rep, 2021, 11(1): 22526. |
| 21 | CORRADI R B, VERTOSICK E A, NGUYEN D P, et al. Nephrometry scores and perioperative outcomes following robotic partial nephrectomy [J]. Int Braz J Urol, 2017, 43(6): 1075-1083. |
| 22 | FURUKAWA J, KANAYAMA H, AZUMA H, et al. ‘Trifecta’ outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a large Japanese multicenter study [J]. Int J Clin Oncol, 2020, 25(2): 347-353. |
| 23 | CIGNOLI D, FALLARA G, LARCHER A, et al. How to improve outcome in nephron-sparing surgery: the impact of new techniques [J]. Curr Opin Urol, 2021, 31(3): 255-261. |
| 24 | MUTELICA L, MOURACADE P, KARA O, et al. No ischemia technique, parenchymal preservation and age are the most important determinants of renal function after partial nephrectomy [J]. Prog Urol, 2020, 30(1): 3-11. |
| [1] | Haiying GENG,Yan YU,Chunmei DAI,Youfeng WEN,Ning LI. Expression of TRIM24 protein in human clear cell renal cell carcinoma tissue and its clinical significance [J]. Journal of Jilin University(Medicine Edition), 2025, 51(2): 486-492. |
| [2] | Qun ZHAO,Yinchun WANG,Xu WANG,Pengxiang HUI,Gaowen TANG,Mengge SUN,Siyu DUAN,Ranwei LI. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for mixed renal cell carcinoma: A case report and literature review [J]. Journal of Jilin University(Medicine Edition), 2023, 49(3): 789-794. |
| [3] | Yangyang SONG,Tingting LIN,Qianyan HE,Huanqiu LIU,Yanhua FENG. Effect of ulinastatin pretreatment on postoperative recipients’ renal function in operation of donation after controllable cardiac death [J]. Journal of Jilin University(Medicine Edition), 2021, 47(2): 469-476. |
| [4] | WEI Yanhong, SONG Shuai, GENG Hui, DIAO Binbin, YANG Guangmin. Clinical significance of detection of alpha 1-microglobulin in serum of patients with chronic hepatitis B [J]. Journal of Jilin University Medicine Edition, 2017, 43(01): 96-100. |
| [5] | MA Dan,XIE Xiao-na,ZOU Jing-tao,LIU Yu-jia,SUN Zhong-hua,GAO Ying. Protective effect of Injection of Milkvetch Root on kidney of diabetic rats and its mechanism [J]. Journal of Jilin University Medicine Edition, 2014, 40(02): 271-275. |
| [6] | GUO Xin-min, JIN Hong,PAN Li-wen,CHEN Hui,LIU Wei,QUAN Xian-yue. Evaluation on changes of early renal function in patients with diabetic nephropathy with contrast-enhanced ultrasound and its clinical significance [J]. Journal of Jilin University Medicine Edition, 2013, 39(1): 156-160. |
| [7] | CHI Chang-liang,LU Zhi-hua|GUAN Jing-jing|WANG Yong,TANG Yu-zhe,CAI Yong. Expression of hMOF histone acetyltransferase in clear cell renal cell carcinoma tissue and its clinical significance [J]. J4, 2012, 38(2): 303-307. |
| [8] | LOU Dong-Mei, MOU Rong, WU Hui, LIU Yu-He, ZHONG Jia-Teng, YU Chun-Yan, YANG Dong-Yan. Determination of expression of Notch signaling pathway protein |in renal cell carcinoma tissues and its significance [J]. J4, 2011, 37(1): 93-96. |
| [9] | ZHANG Chi, GONG Shou-Liang, MENG Tao, LI Cai, CAi Lou, LI Xiao-Kun. Effects of low dose radiation on kidney function and morphology of diabetic mice [J]. J4, 2010, 36(3): 434-438. |