ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2015
Angiomyolipoma being surgically excised for presumed kidney carcinoma.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the important factors involved in angiomyolipoma (AML) being preoperatively misclassified and surgically removed for presumed kidney carcinoma. MATERIALS AND
methodsFrom 2008 to 2014, AML was pathologically confirmed in 38 patients who underwent radical or partial nephrectomy for presumed malignant renal tumor. Control group 1 were patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) matched for age and tumor size; control group 2 were patients with typical AML matched for age and sex. Pertinent data of the studied group and its matched control groups were recorded and analyzed.
resultsThe mean age of the patients in study group was 48.11 ± 12.92 years, and the mean tumor size was 3.12 ± 1.68 cm (range 0.9-9.4). More than 84 % of the misclassified AMLs measured ≤4 cm, and over 21 % patients underwent radical nephrectomy. The only statistically significant feature between the misdiagnosed AML group and the matched RCC group is mean age (48.11 ± 12.92 vs. 56.92 ± 10.28, P = 0.002). Compared with the matched typical AML group, the misdiagnosed AML group has smaller mean tumor size (3.12 ± 1.68 vs. 5.85 ± 3.33, P < 0.001), but more patients undergoing radical nephrectomy (21.05 vs. 0 %, P = 0.003). Two main imaging features, which are hypoechoic on ultrasonography and fat density on computed tomography (CT), were statistically different between the two groups. The misdiagnosis of AML was significantly associated with no fat density on CT (OR 5.528, P = 0.004) and hypoechoic on ultrasonography (OR 3.845, P = 0.017).
conclusionsA number of AMLs were misdiagnosed as RCCs, causing a large number of unnecessary surgeries. No fat density on CT and no hyperechoic on ultrasonography resulting from small tumor size were the two most important factors causing AML being excised for presumed kidney carcinoma. Ultrasonography and CT cannot differentiate atypical AML from kidney carcinoma effectively, so improved renal biopsy and noninvasive biomarkers are urgently warranted to prevent us from excising benign renal tumor aggressively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.