Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37663006›Full record

ArticleResearch and reports in urology2023

The Utility of Renal Mass Biopsy in Large Renal Masses.

Matthew Chau, Ivan Thia, Manmeet Saluja

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research and reports in urology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Matthew Chau *Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3317-212X
Ivan Thia *Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Manmeet SalujaRoyal Perth Hospital, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Royal Perth Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: The role of needle core renal biopsy in large renal masses, defined as lesions larger than 4 cm, is debatable, as larger renal masses are associated with malignant histology. We aim to review the safety and impact of renal biopsy on the management of large renal masses. Methods: A retrospective, single-center review of all renal biopsies performed between January 2011 and December 2020 at Royal Perth Hospital was conducted. Indications for biopsy, complications and final management plans were correlated to assess the value of biopsies in large renal masses. Results: In total, 126 biopsies were performed. Indeterminate imaging findings and comorbidities were the main indications for biopsies. We identified 116 (92.1%) diagnostic biopsies and 10 (8.0%) non-diagnostic biopsies due to insufficient samples or inflammatory tissue. Of the diagnostic biopsies, 99 (78.6%) were malignant and 17 (13.5%) were benign. Unnecessary extirpative surgery was avoided in 17 patients. Histology included renal cell carcinoma (96%) and other malignancies such as urothelial carcinoma (3%) and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (1%). Benign biopsies identified histology including angiomyolipoma (35.3%) and oncocytoma (52.5%). The median follow-up time was 68 months (range 19-132 months). Conclusion: Renal biopsies in large renal masses may aid in preventing unnecessary surgery, especially in situations where imaging findings are equivocal or in patients with many comorbidities.

Indexed as

biopsykidney neoplasmsnephrectomyrenal mass

Identifiers

PMID37663006
PMCPMC10474854
OpenAlexW4386257764

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.