SynthesisWorld journal of urology2021
Available active surveillance follow-up protocols for small renal mass: a systematic review.
Synthesis in World journal of urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Agreement of axial T2-MRI versus Contrast-Enhanced CT for solid renal mass active surveillance.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Renal oncocytoma remains a diagnostic dilemma: imaging heterogeneity and potential overtreatment in a retrospective cohort.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Uncertainty-Aware Framework for CT Radiation Dose Optimization in the Active Surveillance of Small Renal Masses: Clinical and Radiological Considerations.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Balancing Quality and Safety: AI-denoised CT for Active Surveillance of Solid Renal Masses.Radiology. Imaging cancer · 2025Article
- Agreement between Routine-Dose and Lower-Dose CT with and without Deep Learning-based Denoising for Active Surveillance of Solid Small Renal Masses: A Multiobserver Study.Radiology. Imaging cancer · 2025Article
- Accuracy and reproducibility are essential in imaging-based size assessment of renal masses: comment on-"Renal mass imaging modalities: does body mass index (BMI) matter?"International urology and nephrology · 2025Article
- Active Surveillance of Small Renal Masses in a Large Danish Cohort: Assessing Proficiency in Patient Selection.Journal of kidney cancer and VHL · 2024Article
- Radiation dose in CT-based active surveillance of small renal masses may be reduced by 75%: A retrospective exploratory multiobserver study.Research in diagnostic and interventional imaging · 2023Article
- 2022 WUOF/SIU International Consultation on Urological Diseases: Active Surveillance for Small Renal Masses.Societe internationale d'urologie journal : SIUJ · 2022Article
- Current perspectives on active surveillance for patients with small renal masses.Asian journal of urology · 2022Article
- Canadian Urological Association guideline: Management of small renal masses - Full-text.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2022Article
- Renal cancer: overdiagnosis and overtreatment.World journal of urology · 2021Article
- Renal cell cancer treatment: the Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group (LACOG) and the Latin American Renal Cancer Group (LARCG) surgery-focused consensus update.Therapeutic advances in urologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate follow-up strategies for active surveillance of renal masses and to assess contemporary data.
methodsWe performed a comprehensive search of electronic databases (Embase, Medline, and Cochrane). A systematic review of the follow-up protocols was carried out. A total of 20 studies were included.
resultOur analysis highlights that most of the series used different protocols of follow-up without consistent differences in the outcomes. Most common protocol consisted in imaging and clinical evaluation at 3, 6, and 12 months and yearly thereafter. Median length of follow-up was 42 months (range 1-137). Mean age was 74 years (range 67-83). Of 2243 patients 223 (10%) died during the follow-up and 19 patients died of kidney cancer (0.8%). The growth rate was the most used parameter to evaluate disease progression eventually triggering delayed intervention. Maximal axial diameter was the most common method to evaluate growth rate. CT scan is the most used, probably because it is usually more precise than kidney ultrasound and more accessible than MRI. Performing chest X-ray at every check does not seem to alter the clinical outcome during AS.
conclusionThe minimal cancer-specific mortality does not seem to correlate with the follow-up scheme. Outside of growth rate and initial size, imaging features to predict outcome of RCC during AS are limited. Active surveillance of SRM is a well-established treatment option. However, standardized follow-up protocols are lacking. Prospective, randomized, trials to evaluate the best follow-up strategies are pending.
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.