Urologia internationalis · 2024
Clinical Impact and Management of Incidental Renal Findings on Pre-TAVI CT Scan from the Urologist's Perspective.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ziewers Stefanie, Fischer Nikita Druva, Börner Jan Hendrik, Kaufmann Lilly, Tamm Alexander, Yang Yang, Jungmann Florian, Dotzauer Robert, Sparwasser Peter, Hoefner Thomas, Tsaur Igor, Haferkamp Axel, Mager Rene
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to investigate prevalence and impact of incidental renal masses (IRMs) accompanying increasing computed tomography (CT) work-up for symptomatic aortic valve stenosis (sAVS) of the elderly with regard to the relevance of urological consultation for overall survival (OS).
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of pre-transcatheter aortic-valve implantations (TAVIs) CT scans of patients with sAVS (N = 1,253) harboring IRM was performed for 2014-2019. According to the clinical management, groups 1 (urologic consultation) and 2 (findings ignored) were formed and analyzed in terms of OS.
RESULTS: The prevalence of IRM was 9% (119/1,253). In 19% (23/119), urological advice was sought (group 1). At baseline, group 1 showed a significantly higher rate of malignancy-specific lesions compared to 2 (p < 0.01). Other clinical parameters (e.g., age, cardiological scores, comorbidities) did not differ between groups (p > 0.05). In group 1, 4 (17%) findings were histologically confirmed, of which 3 (13%) underwent surgery. There was no significant difference in median OS at a median follow-up of 24.7 months between groups 1 and 2 with 35.7 (95% CI, 5.9; 65.4) and 47.4 months (95% CI, 33.0; 61.7), respectively (p = 0.4). In Cox regression analysis, chronic kidney disease but not urologic work-up or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or heart failure emerged as an independent unfavorable predictor of OS (HR 2.44, 95% CI 1.37; 4.36, p = 0.003).
CONCLUSION: For the first time, a TAVI population with IRM was analyzed from the urologist's perspective. Urologic co-evaluation and work-up does not confer a significant benefit in terms of OS in this particular population.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of pre-transcatheter aortic-valve implantations (TAVIs) CT scans of patients with sAVS (N = 1,253) harboring IRM was performed for 2014-2019. According to the clinical management, groups 1 (urologic consultation) and 2 (findings ignored) were formed and analyzed in terms of OS.
RESULTS: The prevalence of IRM was 9% (119/1,253). In 19% (23/119), urological advice was sought (group 1). At baseline, group 1 showed a significantly higher rate of malignancy-specific lesions compared to 2 (p < 0.01). Other clinical parameters (e.g., age, cardiological scores, comorbidities) did not differ between groups (p > 0.05). In group 1, 4 (17%) findings were histologically confirmed, of which 3 (13%) underwent surgery. There was no significant difference in median OS at a median follow-up of 24.7 months between groups 1 and 2 with 35.7 (95% CI, 5.9; 65.4) and 47.4 months (95% CI, 33.0; 61.7), respectively (p = 0.4). In Cox regression analysis, chronic kidney disease but not urologic work-up or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or heart failure emerged as an independent unfavorable predictor of OS (HR 2.44, 95% CI 1.37; 4.36, p = 0.003).
CONCLUSION: For the first time, a TAVI population with IRM was analyzed from the urologist's perspective. Urologic co-evaluation and work-up does not confer a significant benefit in terms of OS in this particular population.