Introduction: The natural history of small renal masses has been well defined, leading to the recommendation of active surveillance in some patients with limited life expectancy. However, this information is less clear for large renal masses (LRM), leading to ambiguity for management in the older, comorbid patient. The objective of this study was to define the natural history, including the growth rate and metastatic risk, of LRM in order to better counsel patients regarding active surveillance.Methods: This was a retrospective review of patients with solid renal masses >4 cm that had repeated imaging identified from an institutional imaging database. Patient comorbidities and outcomes were obtained through retrospective chart analysis. Outcomes assessed included tumour growth and metastatic rates, as well as cancer-specific (CSS) and overall survival (OS) usimg Kaplan-Meier methodology.Results: We identified 69 patients between 2005 and 2016 who met the inclusion criteria. Mean age at study entry was 75.5 years; mean tumour maximal dimension at study entry was 5.6 cm. CSS was 83% and OS 63% for patients presenting without metastasis, with a mean followup of 57.5 months. The mean growth rate of those that developed metastasis during followup (n=15) was 0.98 cm/year (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33‒1.63) as compared to those that did not develop metastasis (n=46), with a growth rate of 0.67 cm/year (95% CI 0.34‒1) (non-significant). Seven patients had evidence of metastasis at the baseline imaging of their LRM and had subsequent growth rate of 1.47 cm/year (95% CI 0.37‒2.57) (non-significant).Conclusions: Compared to small renal masses, LRM are associated with higher metastasis rates and lower CSS and more rapid growth rates. Selection criteria for recommending observation of LRM in older, comorbid patients should be more conservative than for small renal masses.
Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is a procedure designed to treat portal hypertension. Hospital teaching status is an institutional factor found to be predictive of outcomes following several complex procedures; however, its impact on outcomes following TIPS is unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the association between hospital teaching status and long‐term survival in patients with cirrhosis receiving TIPS. We performed a retrospective population‐based cohort study using linked administrative health data from Ontario, Canada. Adult patients with cirrhosis who received TIPS between January 1, 1998, and December 31, 2016, with follow‐up until December 31, 2017, were included. Hospital teaching status was defined based on hospital participation in the instruction of medical students and/or resident physicians. Liver transplant‐free (LTF) survival was evaluated using Kaplan‐Meier analysis, and overall survival was assessed using competing risks regression analysis, which accounted for hospital clustering. A total of 857 unique patients were included (mean age 57.1 years; 69.1% male). The TIPS procedures were performed in teaching hospitals (84.3%) as well as nonteaching hospitals (15.7%). Median LTF survival was more than twice as long for procedures performed in teaching hospitals compared to nonteaching hospitals (2.2 years versus 0.9 year, respectively;
P
< 0.001). After adjusting for confounders and clustering, hospital teaching status was not independently associated with mortality (nonteaching subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97‐1.81;
P
= 0.08); however, annual hospital procedure volume was (per unit increase sHR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.93‐0.99;
P
= 0.003).
Conclusion:
Hospital procedure volume is associated with long‐term survival following TIPS. These results further support the centralization of TIPS to high‐volume hospitals to improve long‐term outcomes in this population.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.