Small renal mass: what the urologist needs to know for treatment planning and assessment of treatment results. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196:1267-1273. [PMID: 21606288 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.10.6336]

Surgical Approach for Partial Nephrectomy in the Management of Small Renal Masses: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background: A variety of surgical and nonsurgical management options for small renal masses (SRMs) now exist. Surgery in the form of partial nephrectomy (PN) has three different approaches. It is unclear which PN approach, if any, offers superior clinical outcomes. Aim: The aim of this study is to compare outcomes in patients with SRMs <4 cm undergoing PN through the open partial nephrectomy (OPN), laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN), or robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) approach and to establish the advantages and disadvantages of the various approaches. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted for studies comparing at least two of the above techniques. Eighteen studies and 17,013 patients were included in our study. A network meta-analysis with a frequentist framework was performed. OPN was used as the baseline comparator. The prespecified primary outcome was R0 resection rates. Secondary outcomes included operating time, ischemia time, blood loss, transfusion rates, urine leak rates, significant morbidity, length of stay, and recurrence. Results: There was no significant difference between the techniques in terms of R0 rates, tumor recurrence, urine leak rates, renal function, and >3a Clavien-Dindo complications. LPN had a longer ischemic time and operating time. OPN had a longer length of stay and higher average intraoperative blood loss. RPN had lower blood transfusion rates. Discussion: All approaches are acceptable from an oncological perspective. The minimally invasive approaches (i.e., RPN and LPN) offer advantages in terms of morbidity; however, LPN may increase ischemic time and operative duration. Variations between perioperative outcomes may influence the choice of approach on a case-by-case and institutional basis.

Current management of small renal masses

One of the consequences of the growing use of diagnostic imaging techniques is the notable growth in the detection of small renal masses presumably corresponding to localized tumors that are potentially curable with surgical treatment. When faced with the finding of a small renal mass, radiologists must determine whether it is benign or malignant, and if it is malignant, what subtype it belong to, and whether it should be managed with surgical treatment, with ablative techniques, or with watchful waiting with active surveillance. Small renal masses are now a clinical entity that require management different from the approaches used for classical renal cell carcinomas. In this scenario, radiologists are key because they are involved in all aspects of the management of these tumors, including in their diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up.

Clinical utility of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in the diagnosis of benign and malignant small renal masses among Asian population

We assessed the clinical utility of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) in the diagnosis of benign and malignant small renal masses using a meta-analysis of diagnostic test. We performed a comprehensive online search in the following database including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Wanfang, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure from the inception to August 25, 2019. the following index were calculated for assessing the diagnostic ability, including sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), area under the curve (AUC) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Seventeen studies were included in the qualitative and quantitative analyses. The overall sensitivity was 0.93 with 95% CI of 0.88-0.95. The specificity was 0.71 and the 95% CI was 0.60-0.80. The pooled AUC was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.88-0.93). The diagnostic odds ratio was 31 (95% CI: 21-45). The NLR and PLR were 0.10 (95% CI: 0.07-0.15) and 3.2(95% CI: 2.3-4.4), respectively. There is a slight heterogeneity within studies. The subgroup analysis was also performed. For retrospective and perspective, the sensitivity and specificity were 0.93, 0.92 and 0.71, 0.73; For different diameter lesions, the sensitivity and specificity were 0.93, 0.94 and 0.64, 0.74; For sample size (≤median vs. >median), the sensitivity and specificity were 0.94, 0.93 and 0.67, 0.77. The Deek's funnel plot asymmetry test in indicated no publication bias. The CEUS have a high diagnostic ability in differentiating benign and malignant small renal masses among Asian population.

Common pitfalls in renal mass evaluation: a practical guide

More than half of patients over 50 years of age have had at least one focal renal lesion detected as an incidental finding during an ultrasound, computed tomography, or magnetic resonance imaging examination. Although the majority of such lesions can be easily detected and correctly characterized, misdiagnoses may occur and are often related to methodological limitations, inappropriate imaging protocols, or misinterpretation. This pictorial essay provides recommendations on how to recognize benign and malignant renal processes that can be potentially missed or mischaracterized in imaging studies.

The Role of Ablation and Minimally Invasive Techniques in the Management of Small Renal Masses

CONTEXT

Nephron-sparing approaches are increasingly recommended for incidental small renal masses. Herein, we review the current literature regarding the safety and efficacy of focal therapy, including percutaneous ablation, for small renal masses.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the application of ablative therapy in the management of small renal masses.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

PubMed and Medline database search was performed to look for findings published since 2000 on focal therapy for small renal masses. After literature review, 64 articles were selected and discussed.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Radiofrequency ablation and cryotherapy are the most widely used procedures with intermediate-term oncological outcome comparable with surgical series. Cost effectiveness seems excellent and side effects appear acceptable. To date, no randomized trial comparing percutaneous focal therapy with standard surgical approach or active surveillance has been performed.

CONCLUSIONS

Focal ablative therapies are now accepted as effective treatment for small renal tumors. For tumors <3cm, oncological effectiveness of ablative therapies is comparable with that of partial nephrectomy. Percutaneous ablation has fewer complications and a better postoperative profile when compared with minimally invasive partial nephrectomy.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Focal ablative therapies are now accepted as effective treatment for small renal tumors. For tumors <3cm, oncological effectiveness of ablative therapies is comparable with that of partial nephrectomy.

Kidney function outcomes following thermal ablation of small renal masses

The diagnosis of small renal masses (SRMs) continues to increase likely attributable to widespread use of axial cross-sectional imaging. Many of these SRMs present in elderly patients with abnormal baseline renal function. Such patients are at risk for further decline following therapeutic intervention. Renal thermal ablation presents one approach for management of SRMs whereby tumors are treated in situ without need for global renal ischemia. These treatment characteristics contribute to favorable renal function outcomes following kidney tumor ablation particularly in patients with an anatomic or functional solitary renal unit.

Accuracy of Contrast-enhanced US for Differentiating Benign from Malignant Solid Small Renal Masses

PURPOSE

To test the hypothesis that qualitative and quantitative features of contrast material-enhanced ultrasonography (US) can be used to differentiate benign from malignant small renal masses.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is an institutional review board approved, HIPAA-compliant prospective study with written informed consent. Patients with histologically characterized solid small renal masses, excluding lipid-rich angiomyolipomas, underwent qualitative contrast-enhanced US with a combination of three different US machines. A subgroup of patients underwent quantitative contrast-enhanced US. Patients received a bolus injection of 0.2 mL of contrast material for qualitative and quantitative evaluations and were followed for 3 minutes. Two radiologists independently reviewed videotaped qualitative contrast-enhanced US examinations and were blinded to the final diagnoses. Features that were evaluated included lesion vascularity relative to the adjacent cortex in the arterial phase, the presence of a capsule, homogeneity, the pattern of vascularity, and washout. One radiologist separately reviewed a subset of contrast-enhanced US examinations that were performed with all three machines. Parameters of a first-pass time intensity curve were calculated for quantitative analysis. The Mann-Whitney test was used for quantitative parameters, the χ(2) or Fisher exact test was used for qualitative parameters, and κ statistics and Fleiss methodology were used to determine interobserver and intermachine agreement.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 91 patients (35 women and 56 men) with 94 lesions. The mean age was 62 years ± 14 (range, 21-91). Three patients had two lesions each, which were evaluated at two different sessions. There were 26 benign small renal masses (including 18 oncocytomas, seven lipid-poor angiomyolipomas, and one hemangioblastoma) and 68 malignant masses (including 41 clear cell, 20 papillary, and seven chromophobe renal cell carcinomas [RCCs[) that were 1.1-4.0 cm in diameter (mean, 2.7 cm ± 0.9). All patients underwent contrast-enhanced US on the same one machine, and 68 patients were imaged on all three machines. Vascularity was present in all lesions (n = 94) at contrast-enhanced US. Lesion hypovascularity relative to the adjacent cortex in the arterial phase was seen in only malignant lesions by both reviewers; reviewer 1 saw hypovascularity in 24 of 94 lesions (P = .0001), and reviewer 2 saw hypovascularity in 21 of 94 lesions (P = .0006), for a specificity of 100% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 84, 100). This feature had κ values of 0.91 (95%CI: 0.82, 1.00) between the two reviewers and 0.85 (95% CI: 0.72, 0.99) between the three machines. Eighteen of 20 papillary RCCs were hypovascular. Quantitative parameters of area under the receiver operating characteristics curve, peak intensity, wash-in slope of 10%-90% and 5%-45%, and washout slope of 100%-10% and 50%-10% were significantly higher in malignant renal masses (P = .018, P = .002, P = .036, P = .016, P = .001, and P = .005, respectively) than in benign lesions.

CONCLUSION

Excluding lipid-rich angiomyolipoma, hypovascularity-which has high interobserver and intermachine agreement-of solid small renal masses relative to the cortex in the arterial phase has 100% specificity (95% CI: 84, 100) for detecting malignancy, most often papillary RCC.

Renal cell carcinoma

The treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has changed greatly over the past 15 years. Progress in the surgical management of the primary tumor and increased understanding of the molecular biology and genomics of the disease have led to the development of new therapeutic agents. The management of the primary tumor has changed owing to the realization that clean margins around the primary lesion are sufficient to prevent local recurrence, as well as the development of more sophisticated tools and techniques that increase the safety of partial nephrectomy. The management of advanced disease has altered even more dramatically as a result of new agents that target the tumor vasculature or that attenuate the activation of intracellular oncogenic pathways. This review summarizes data from prospective randomized phase III studies on the surgical management and systemic treatment of RCC, and provides an up to date summary of the histology, genomics, staging, and prognosis of RCC. It describes the management of the primary tumor and offers an overview of systemic agents that form the mainstay of treatment for advanced disease. The review concludes with an introduction to the exciting new class of immunomodulatory agents that are currently in clinical trials and may form the basis of a new therapeutic approach for patients with advanced RCC.