Scholarlink

Purpose <p>Nephrometry scores are essential tools for classifying and comparing tumor complexity and guiding surgical planning in partial nephrectomy. However, their performance in single-port robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (SP-RAPN) has not been formally assessed. We aimed to externally validate and compare the predictive performance of the Preoperative Aspects and Dimensions Used for an Anatomical (PADUA), Radius-Exophytic/Endophytic-Nearness-Anterior/Posterior-Location (RENAL), and Simplified PADUA Renal (SPARE) nephrometry scores in patients undergoing SP-RAPN.</p> Methods <p>We retrospectively reviewed 211 consecutive patients who underwent SP-RAPN for solitary ≤ cT2 renal tumors at two academic centers between 2019 and 2024. The primary endpoint was Trifecta achievement, defined as the simultaneous presence of negative surgical margins, absence of perioperative complications, and warm ischemia time ≤ 25&#xa0;min. Discrimination and clinical utility of each nephrometry score were assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and decision curve analysis (DCA). Multivariable logistic regression adjusted for relevant clinical covariates.</p> Results <p>Trifecta was achieved in 50.7% of patients. The SPARE score demonstrated the highest discriminative performance (AUC 0.681), followed by PADUA (0.661) and RENAL (0.654), though these differences were not statistically significant. DCA showed overlapping net benefit curves, with SPARE offering marginally superior. Limitations include the retrospective design and underrepresentation of highly complex tumors.</p> Conclusions <p>PADUA, RENAL, and SPARE scores show comparable performance in predicting Trifecta achievement in the setting of SP-RAPN. SPARE may perform slightly better, and it represents a more practical choice for routine preoperative assessment due to its ease of use. </p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Predicting surgical outcomes in single-port robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: external validation and comparative analysis of PADUA, RENAL, and SPARE scores

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月20日

查看全文
  • Filippo Carletti,
  • Fabio Maria Valenzi,
  • Flavia Tamborino,
  • Alexandru Turcan,
  • Valerio Santarelli,
  • Arianna Biasatti,
  • Luca Alfredo Morgantini,
  • Hakan Bahadir Haberal,
  • Srinivas Vourganti,
  • Fabrizio Dal Moro,
  • Riccardo Autorino,
  • Simone Crivellaro

摘要

Purpose

Nephrometry scores are essential tools for classifying and comparing tumor complexity and guiding surgical planning in partial nephrectomy. However, their performance in single-port robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (SP-RAPN) has not been formally assessed. We aimed to externally validate and compare the predictive performance of the Preoperative Aspects and Dimensions Used for an Anatomical (PADUA), Radius-Exophytic/Endophytic-Nearness-Anterior/Posterior-Location (RENAL), and Simplified PADUA Renal (SPARE) nephrometry scores in patients undergoing SP-RAPN.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 211 consecutive patients who underwent SP-RAPN for solitary ≤ cT2 renal tumors at two academic centers between 2019 and 2024. The primary endpoint was Trifecta achievement, defined as the simultaneous presence of negative surgical margins, absence of perioperative complications, and warm ischemia time ≤ 25 min. Discrimination and clinical utility of each nephrometry score were assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and decision curve analysis (DCA). Multivariable logistic regression adjusted for relevant clinical covariates.

Results

Trifecta was achieved in 50.7% of patients. The SPARE score demonstrated the highest discriminative performance (AUC 0.681), followed by PADUA (0.661) and RENAL (0.654), though these differences were not statistically significant. DCA showed overlapping net benefit curves, with SPARE offering marginally superior. Limitations include the retrospective design and underrepresentation of highly complex tumors.

Conclusions

PADUA, RENAL, and SPARE scores show comparable performance in predicting Trifecta achievement in the setting of SP-RAPN. SPARE may perform slightly better, and it represents a more practical choice for routine preoperative assessment due to its ease of use.