Abbreviations & AcronymsObjective: To investigate the clinical significance of preoperative aspects and dimensions used for anatomic (PADUA) and radius exophytic/endophytic nearness anterior/posterior location (RENAL) scoring systems for renal neoplasms in patients undergoing laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Methods: A retrospective analysis was carried out on clinical data of 245 Chinese patients with renal neoplasms undergoing laparoscopic partial nephrectomy from June 2008 to June 2012. The perioperative complications and variables, as well as PADUA and RENAL score, were compared. Results: The PADUA and RENAL scoring systems were significantly associated with percent change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (P = 0.032 and P = 0.026 respectively), whereas the RENAL scoring system was also significantly associated with warm ischemia time (P = 0.032). On multivariate analysis, both scores were able to predict percent change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (PADUA, P = 0.011; RENAL, P = 0.028). There were no significant associations between the two scoring systems assessed and the occurrence of complications or tumor stage. The correlation between PADUA classification and RENAL nephrometry score was significant (P < 0.0001). Fleiss' generalized kappa was 0.69-0.89 for the various components of the PADUA score and 0.67-0.89 for the RENAL nephrometry components. Conclusions:The PADUA classification and RENAL nephrometry score are comprehensive assessment tools for delineating renal tumor anatomy. The reproducibility of the PADUA and RENAL scores is substantial, but further research is required to evaluate its performance in more accurately predicting operative and patient-related outcomes.

Background To investigate and compare the clinical and imaging features among family members infected with COVID-19. Methods We retrospectively collected a total of 34 COVID-19 cases (15 male, 19 female, aged 48 ± 16 years, ranging from 10 to 81 years) from 13 families from January 17, 2020 through February 15, 2020. Patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 - part of the family members (first-generation) who had exposure history and others (second-generation) infected through them, and Group 2 - patients from the same family having identical exposure history. We collected clinical symptoms, laboratory findings, and high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) features for each patient. Comparison tests were performed between the first- and second-generation patients in Group 1. Results In total there were 21 patients in Group 1 and 20 patients in Group 2. For Group 1, first-generation patients had significantly higher white blood cell count (6.5 × 10 9 /L (interquartile range (IQR): 4.9–9.2 × 10 9 /L) vs 4.5 × 10 9 /L (IQR: 3.7–5.3 × 10 9 /L); P = 0.0265), higher neutrophil count (4.9 × 10 9 /L (IQR: 3.6–7.3 × 10 9 /L) vs 2.9 × 10 9 /L (IQR: 2.1–3.3 × 10 9 /L); P = 0.0111), and higher severity scores on HRCT (3.9 ± 2.4 vs 2.0 ± 1.3, P = 0.0362) than the second-generation patients. Associated underlying diseases (odds ratio, 8.0, 95% confidence interval: 3.4–18.7, P = 0.0013) were significantly correlated with radiologic severity scores in second-generation patients. Conclusion Analysis of the family cluster cases suggests that COVID-19 had no age or sex predominance. Secondarily infected patients in a family tended to develop milder illness, but this was not true for those with existing comorbidities.

No abstract