ArticleInternational braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
Surgical treatment for renal masses in the elderly: analysis of oncological, surgical and functional outcomes.
Article in International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk factors for postoperative delirium in elderly urological patients: A meta-analysis.Medicine · 2022Pooled it
- A novel brachytherapy and chemotherapy integrated ureteral stent: In vitro and in vivo study.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2025Article
- Assessment of the effectiveness of radiofrequency ablation as a technique for destroying small renal tumors in patients older than 70.Central European journal of urology · 2020Article
- Prognostic Significance of Advanced Age in Patients with T1a Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated by Microwave Ablation: A 16-Year Experience.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRadical treatment in elderly patients with renal tumor remains debatable due to uncertainties regarding the risk of surgical complications, risk of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and survival benefit. The aim of the study was to assess outcomes of radical treatment for renal cancer in elderly patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective analysis enrolled 507 consecutive patients treated with partial or radical nephrectomy due to renal mass. Patients with upfront metastatic disease (n=46) and patients lost to follow-up (n=110) were excluded from the analysis. Surgical, functional (screen for ESRD development) and survival outcomes were analyzed in patients aged >75 years in comparison to younger individuals.
resultsThe analyzed group included 55 elderly patients and 296 younger controls. Within the cohort a total of 148 and 203 patients underwent radical and partial nephrectomies respectively. The rate of surgical complications, including grade >3 Clavien- Dindo complications, did not differ between groups (3.6% vs. 4.4%, p=0.63). Median length of hospital stay was equal in both groups (7 days). During a follow-up (median 51.9 months, no difference between groups), ESRD occurred in 3.4% of controls and was not reported in elderly group (p=0.37). Younger patients demonstrated a statistically significant advantage in both overall survival and cancer-specific survival over elderly patients (OS 94.6% vs. 87% p=0.036, CSS 97.3% vs. 89.1% p=0.0008).
conclusionsSurgical treatment in elderly patients with renal tumor is as safe as in younger individuals and does not increase the risk of ESRD. However, cancer specific survival among these patients remains shorter than in younger patients.
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.