R.E.N.A.L. Nephrometry Score Profile of Kidney Cancer Patients in Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital

Rinto Hariwibowo -  University of Indonesia, Indonesia
Agus Rizal AH Hamid -  University of Indonesia, Indonesia
Chaidir Arif Mochtar* -  University of Indonesia, Indonesia

DOI : 10.33371/ijoc.v13i3.656

Background: The variation of sizes, shapes, and location of kidney cancer complicates the choices of surgical treatment.To determine which technique to use, R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry scoring systems were established. This study was conducted to evaluate R.E.N.A.L.-NS profile in kidney cancer patients at CMH

Method: The data were collected retrospectively from patients that underwent both open and laparoscopic Radical (RN) and Partial Nephrectomy (PN) procedure from 2014-2017. R.E.N.A.L.-NS was calculated based on (R)adius, (E)xophytic/ Endophytic properties, (N)earness to the collecting system, (A)nterior or Posterior position of the tumor, and (L)ocation of the tumor. It was categorized into three complexity: low (4-6 points), medium (7-9 points), and high (10-12 points). Subjects then divided based on the procedure given. Profile of R.E.N.A.L.-NS was shown based on each procedure.

Result: In this study, 63 patients were included. 52 underwent RN and 11 underwent PN. In low complexity tumors, all patients received PN. In medium complexity tumors, 22 (78.5%) patients received RN and 6 (21.5%) received PN. All high complexity tumors received RN. Mean renal score in all patient 9.03 (+1.72), RN 9.59 (+1.11), PN 6.36 (+1.6). Higher (R), (N), and (L) scores mean a higher prevalence of RN.

Conclusion: Higher complexity tumors were more likely to be treated with RN. Furthermore, (R), (N), and (L) score can be useful to determine RN or PN as a treatment of choice. This study could be used as a reference to another study regarding R.E.N.A.L.-NS in Indonesia.

Keywords
kidney cancer, nephrectomy, R.E.N.A.L nephrometry
  1. Kutikov A, Uzzo RG. The R.E.N.A.L. Nephrometry score: A comprehensive standardized system for quantitating renal tumor size, location, and depth. J Urol. 2009;182:844–53.
  2. Monn MF, Gellhaus PT, Masterson TA, Patel AA, Tann M, Cregar DM, et al. R.E.N.A.L. Nephrometry scoring: How well correlated are urologist, radiologist, and collaborator scores?. J Endourol. 2014;28:1006–10.
  3. Zhou HJ, Yan Y, Zhang JZ, Liang LR, Guo SB. Role of R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Chin Med J (Engl). 2017;130:2170–5.
  4. Mottrie A, Gandaglia G. Do we need a novel nephrometry scoring system in partial nephrectomy?. Eur Urol. 2016;69:80–1.
  5. Reddy UD, Pillai R, Parker RA, Weston J, Burgess NA, Ho ETS, et al. Prediction of complications after partial nephrectomy by RENAL nephrometry score. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2014;96:475–9.
  6. Wong M, Cho K, Ho K, Lai CT, Man CM, Yiu MK. How can the R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry scoring system aid management of a solid renal mass?. Hong Kong Med J. 2013;20:37–44.
  7. Shaaban MS, Youssif TMA, Mostafa A, Hegazy HE, Atta MA. Role of RENAL nephrometry scoring system in planning surgical intervention in patients with localized renal masses. Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med. 2015;46:1175–81.
  8. Umbas R, Hardjowijoto S, Safriadi F, Mochtar CA, Djatisoesanto W, Soedarsono MA, et al. Guidelines on renal malignant tumour. Indones Urol Assoc. 2012;1–7.
  9. Ljungberg B, Bensalah K, Vice-chair AB, Bex A, Giles RH, Hora M, et al. EAU Guidelines on renal cell carcinoma. Eur Assoc Urol. 2017;1–62.
  10. Carroll RN, BSN, MBA CM. Kidney cancer. NCCN Clin Pract Guidel Oncol 2018;3:4-43.
  11. Parsons RB, Canter D, Kutikov A, Uzzo RG. RENAL nephrometry scoring system: The radiologist’s perspective. Am J Roentgenol. 2012;199:355–9.
  12. Canter D, Kutikov A, Manley B, Egleston B, Simhan J, Smaldone M, et al. Utility of the R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry scoring system in objectifying treatment decision-making of the enhancing renal mass. Urology. 2011;78:1089–94.
  13. Okhunov Z, Rais-Bahrami S, George AK, Waingankar N, Duty B, Montag S, et al. The comparison of three renal tumor scoring systems: C-Index, P.A.D.U.A., and R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry scores. J Endourol. 2011;25:1921–24.
  14. Nagahara A, Uemura M, Kawashima A, Ujike T, Fujita K, Miyagawa Y, et al. R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score predicts postoperative recurrence of localized renal cell carcinoma treated by radical nephrectomy. Int J Clin Oncol. 2016;21:367–72.
  15. Kopp RP, Mehrazin R, Palazzi KL, Liss MA, Jabaji R, Mirheydar MS, et al. Survival outcomes after radical and partial nephrectomy for clinical T2 renal tumours categorised by R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score. BJU Int. 2014;114:708–18.
  16. WHO. GLOBOCAN: Estimated cancer incidence, mortality, and prevalence worldwide in 2012. c2012 - [cited 2018 February 1]. Available from: http://globocan.iarc.fr/Pages/fact_sheets_population.aspx
  17. Lin TP, Kao YM, Chen M, Sun FJ, Lin WR. Functional outcome prediction after partial nephrectomy using R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry, PADUA classification, and Centrality index score. Urol Sci. 2017;28:10–3.
  18. Borgmann H, Reiss AK, Kurosch M, Filmann N, Frees S, Mager R, et al. R.E.N.A.L. score outperforms PADUA score, C-Index and DAP score for outcome prediction of nephron sparing surgery in a selected cohort. J Urol. 2016;196:664–71.

Full Text:
Article Info
Submitted: 2019-06-12
Published: 2019-10-16
Section: Research Articles
Article Statistics: 41 30