FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2000966400> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2000966400 endingPage "34" @default.
• W2000966400 startingPage "27" @default.
• W2000966400 abstract "No AccessUrology PracticePatient Care1 May 2014Overall Survival after Partial Versus Radical Nephrectomy for a Small Renal Mass: Systematic Review of Observational Studies Emil Scosyrev, Kevin Wu, Helen R. Levey, Vineet Agrawal, Carla Beckham, Guan Wu, and Edward Messing Emil ScosyrevEmil Scosyrev More articles by this author , Kevin WuKevin Wu More articles by this author , Helen R. LeveyHelen R. Levey More articles by this author , Vineet AgrawalVineet Agrawal More articles by this author , Carla BeckhamCarla Beckham More articles by this author , Guan WuGuan Wu More articles by this author , and Edward MessingEdward Messing More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.urpr.2014.02.009AboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract Introduction: In EORTC trial 30904 of partial versus radical nephrectomy overall survival was significantly better in the radical nephrectomy arm. However, many observational studies reported better survival after partial than radical nephrectomy. We present an updated systematic review of observational studies of overall survival after partial versus radical nephrectomy with assessment of quality of evidence. Methods: The literature search was performed until December 31, 2013, and all studies reporting overall survival after partial vs radical nephrectomy were included in the initial review. Further inclusion criteria for complete review were malignant tumors 7 cm or smaller, or benign tumors of any size, and survival analysis performed with adjustment for confounding variables. Studies not meeting these criteria were excluded from full review because of selection bias in favor of patients treated with partial nephrectomy who were younger and with less advanced tumors. Results: A total of 34 studies were included in the initial review and 13 were included in the full review. The 13 studies were based on the SEER database (6) or on institutional cohorts (7). In 8 of the 13 studies the estimated hazard ratios were significantly below 1, indicating better overall survival after partial nephrectomy, while in the remaining 5 studies estimated HR was not significantly different from 1. Median HR was 0.80 (interquartile range 0.57 to 0.96, absolute range 0.40 to 1.10). Conclusions: In most observational studies overall survival was better after partial than after radical nephrectomy. However, because residual confounding could be present despite adjustment for measured covariates, another randomized trial of partial vs radical nephrectomy may be needed to confirm or refute the findings of EORTC 30904. References 1 : Comparative effectiveness for survival and renal function of partial and radical nephrectomy for localized renal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Urol2012; 188: 51. Link, Google Scholar 2 : Re: comparative effectiveness for survival and renal function of partial and radical nephrectomy for localized renal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Urol2013; 189: 1167. Google Scholar 3 : Elective conservative surgery for renal carcinoma versus radical nephrectomy: a prospective study. Br J Urol1997; 79: 15. Google Scholar 4 : A prospective, randomised EORTC intergroup phase 3 study comparing the oncologic outcome of elective nephron-sparing surgery and radical nephrectomy for low-stage renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol2011; 59: 543. Google Scholar 5 : Renal function after nephron-sparing surgery versus radical nephrectomy: results from EORTC randomized trial 30904. Eur Urol2014; 65: 372. Google Scholar 6 : Outcome of stage T2 or greater renal cell cancer treated with partial nephrectomy. J Urol2010; 183: 903. Link, Google Scholar 7 : Comparison of complications after radical and partial nephrectomy: results from the National Veterans Administration Surgical Quality Improvement Program. BJU Int2000; 86: 782. Google Scholar 8 : Impact of body mass index on survival of patients with surgically treated renal cell carcinoma. J Urol2006; 175: 46. Link, Google Scholar 9 : Renal cell carcinoma in octogenarians: nephron sparing surgery should remain the standard of care. J Urol2011; 185: 415. Link, Google Scholar 10 : Survival outcomes after radical and partial nephrectomy for clinical T2 renal tumors categorized by RENAL nephrometry score. BJU Int2013; . Epub ahead of print. Google Scholar 11 : Surgically induced chronic kidney disease may be associated with a lower risk of progression and mortality than medical chronic kidney disease. J Urol2013; 189: 1649. Link, Google Scholar 12 : Disease outcome in patients with low stage renal cell carcinoma treated with nephron sparing or radical surgery. J Urol1996; 155: 1868. Link, Google Scholar 13 : Renal and cardiovascular morbidity after partial or radical nephrectomy. Cancer2008; 112: 511. Google Scholar 14 : Survival after diagnosis of localized T1a kidney cancer: current population-based practice of surgery and nonsurgical management. Urology2014; 83: 126. Google Scholar 15 : Survival rates after resection for localized kidney cancer: 1989 to 2004. Cancer2008; 113: 84. Google Scholar 16 : Laparoscopic radical versus partial nephrectomy for tumors >4 cm: intermediate-term oncologic and functional outcomes. Urology2009; 73: 1077. Google Scholar 17 : Management of small unilateral renal cell carcinomas: radical versus nephron-sparing surgery. Urology1995; 45: 34. Google Scholar 18 : Nephron-sparing surgery compared with radical nephrectomy for renal tumors: current indications and results. South Med J1997; 90: 982. Google Scholar 19 : Comparison of partial and radical nephrectomy for pT1b renal cell carcinoma. Korean J Urol2010; 51: 596. Google Scholar 20 : Kidney function following partial or radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: a population-based study. Scand J Urol2013; 47: 476. Google Scholar 21 : Can partial nephrectomy preserve renal function and modify survival in comparison with radical nephrectomy?. Scand J Urol Nephrol2011; 45: 143. Google Scholar 22 : Surgical management of renal tumors 4 cm. or less in a contemporary cohort. J Urol2000; 163: 730. Link, Google Scholar 23 : Partial nephrectomy does not compromise survival in patients with pathologic upstaging to pT2/pT3 or high-grade renal tumors compared with radical nephrectomy. Urology2011; 77: 1142. Google Scholar 24 : Overall survival advantage with partial nephrectomy: a bias of observational data?. Cancer2013; 119: 2981. Google Scholar 25 : Does partial nephrectomy result in a durable overall survival benefit in the Medicare population?. J Urol2012; 188: 2089. Link, Google Scholar 26 : Comparative effectiveness, costs and trends in treatment of small renal masses from 2005 to 2007. BJU Int2013; 112: E273. Google Scholar 27 : Overall survival and development of stage IV chronic kidney disease in patients undergoing partial and radical nephrectomy for benign renal tumors. Eur Urol2013; 64: 600. Google Scholar 28 : Long-term survival following partial vs radical nephrectomy among older patients with early-stage kidney cancer. JAMA2012; 307: 1629. Google Scholar 29 : Radical nephrectomy for pT1a renal masses may be associated with decreased overall survival compared with partial nephrectomy. J Urol2008; 179: 468. Link, Google Scholar 30 : Partial nephrectomy versus radical nephrectomy in patients with small renal tumors–is there a difference in mortality and cardiovascular outcomes?. J Urol2009; 181: 55. Link, Google Scholar 31 : Partial versus radical nephrectomy for 4 to 7 cm renal cortical tumors. J Urol2009; 182: 2601. Link, Google Scholar 32 : Partial nephrectomy is associated with improved overall survival compared to radical nephrectomy in patients with unanticipated benign renal tumours. Eur Urol2010; 58: 293. Google Scholar 33 : Nephrectomy induced chronic renal insufficiency is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular death and death from any cause in patients with localized cT1b renal masses. J Urol2010; 183: 1317. Link, Google Scholar 34 : Survival after partial and radical nephrectomy for the treatment of stage T1bN0M0 renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the USA: a propensity scoring approach. BJU Int2012; 109: 1457. Google Scholar 35 : Matched comparison of radical nephrectomy vs nephron-sparing surgery in patients with unilateral renal cell carcinoma and a normal contralateral kidney. Mayo Clin Proc2000; 75: 1236. Google Scholar 36 : Comparison of long-term results after nephron-sparing surgery and radical nephrectomy in treating 4- to 7-cm renal cell carcinoma. Medicina (Kaunas)2013; 49: 223. Google Scholar 37 : Increased risk of overall and cardiovascular mortality after radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma 2 cm or less. J Urol2011; 186: 1247. Link, Google Scholar 38 : Radical versus partial nephrectomy: effect on overall and noncancer mortality. Cancer2009; 115: 1465. Google Scholar 39 : Instruments for causal inference: an epidemiologist's dream?. Epidemiology2006; 17: 360. Google Scholar 40 : Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables in randomized trials with stochastic compliance. Biom J2013; 55: 97. Google Scholar 41 : Radical versus partial nephrectomy for a small renal mass: does saving nephrons save lives?. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther2013; 13: 1349. Google Scholar 42 : Reply from Authors re: R. Houston Thompson. Partial Versus Radical Nephrectomy: The Debate Regarding Renal Function Ends While the Survival Controversy Continues. Eur Urol2014; 65: 379. Google Scholar 43 : A prospective randomized EORTC intergroup phase 3 study comparing the complications of elective nephron-sparing surgery and radical nephrectomy for low-stage renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol2007; 51: 1606. Google Scholar 44 : Chronic kidney disease and the risks of death, cardiovascular events, and hospitalization. N Engl J Med2004; 351: 1296. Google Scholar 45 : Long-term consequences of kidney donation. N Engl J Med2009; 360: 459. Google Scholar 46 : Mortality and morbidity in patients receiving encainide, flecainide, or placebo. The Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial. N Engl J Med1991; 324: 781. Google Scholar 47 : The Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial: first CAST… then CAST-II. J Am Coll Cardiol1992; 19: 894. Google Scholar © 2014 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited BySuk-Ouichai C, Tanaka H, Wang Y, Wu J, Ye Y, Demirjian S, Li J and Campbell S (2019) Renal Cancer Surgery in Patients without Preexisting Chronic Kidney Disease—Is There a Survival Benefit for Partial Nephrectomy?Journal of Urology, VOL. 201, NO. 6, (1088-1096), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2019. Volume 1Issue 1May 2014Page: 27-34 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2014 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Keywordscarcinomarenal cellnephrectomyMetricsAuthor Information Emil Scosyrev More articles by this author Kevin Wu More articles by this author Helen R. Levey More articles by this author Vineet Agrawal More articles by this author Carla Beckham More articles by this author Guan Wu More articles by this author Edward Messing More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF DownloadLoading ..." @default.
• W2000966400 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2000966400 creator A5009708128 @default.
• W2000966400 creator A5016465335 @default.
• W2000966400 creator A5034912978 @default.
• W2000966400 creator A5048156830 @default.
• W2000966400 creator A5051018110 @default.
• W2000966400 creator A5065149247 @default.
• W2000966400 creator A5086438198 @default.
• W2000966400 date "2014-05-01" @default.
• W2000966400 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2000966400 title "Overall Survival after Partial Versus Radical Nephrectomy for a Small Renal Mass: Systematic Review of Observational Studies" @default.
• W2000966400 cites W1479974779 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W153480272 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W1638591339 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W1691274366 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W1832087786 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W1982054739 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W1988374210 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W1992882990 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W1994604939 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W1996859731 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2000785370 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2001469462 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2002374666 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2006150388 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2007991740 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2014304235 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2019192689 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2027026910 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2029070723 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2039823928 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2039948400 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2041595467 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2051771897 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2060762436 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2061056147 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2063261957 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2064275611 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2066151709 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2074450945 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2074517129 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2087292401 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2097746043 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2097975386 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2102449244 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2115303260 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2130020900 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2133292887 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2141036520 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2145632027 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2146050890 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2151682947 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2156069570 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2156943692 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2167545922 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2401946146 @default.
• W2000966400 cites W2977185743 @default.
• W2000966400 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urpr.2014.02.009" @default.
• W2000966400 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37533219" @default.
• W2000966400 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W2000966400 type Work @default.
• W2000966400 sameAs 2000966400 @default.
• W2000966400 citedByCount "5" @default.
• W2000966400 countsByYear W20009664002015 @default.
• W2000966400 countsByYear W20009664002017 @default.
• W2000966400 countsByYear W20009664002019 @default.
• W2000966400 countsByYear W20009664002023 @default.
• W2000966400 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2000966400 hasAuthorship W2000966400A5009708128 @default.
• W2000966400 hasAuthorship W2000966400A5016465335 @default.
• W2000966400 hasAuthorship W2000966400A5034912978 @default.
• W2000966400 hasAuthorship W2000966400A5048156830 @default.
• W2000966400 hasAuthorship W2000966400A5051018110 @default.
• W2000966400 hasAuthorship W2000966400A5065149247 @default.
• W2000966400 hasAuthorship W2000966400A5086438198 @default.
• W2000966400 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2000966400 hasConcept C126894567 @default.
• W2000966400 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2000966400 hasConcept C23131810 @default.
• W2000966400 hasConcept C2780091579 @default.
• W2000966400 hasConcept C2780227381 @default.
• W2000966400 hasConcept C2992994880 @default.
• W2000966400 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2000966400 hasConceptScore W2000966400C126322002 @default.
• W2000966400 hasConceptScore W2000966400C126894567 @default.
• W2000966400 hasConceptScore W2000966400C141071460 @default.
• W2000966400 hasConceptScore W2000966400C23131810 @default.
• W2000966400 hasConceptScore W2000966400C2780091579 @default.
• W2000966400 hasConceptScore W2000966400C2780227381 @default.
• W2000966400 hasConceptScore W2000966400C2992994880 @default.
• W2000966400 hasConceptScore W2000966400C71924100 @default.
• W2000966400 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2000966400 hasLocation W20009664001 @default.
• W2000966400 hasLocation W20009664002 @default.
• W2000966400 hasOpenAccess W2000966400 @default.
• W2000966400 hasPrimaryLocation W20009664001 @default.
• W2000966400 hasRelatedWork W2044805139 @default.

• next