2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2021.02.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Percutaneous Ablation Versus Surgical Resection for Local Recurrence Following Partial Nephrectomy for Renal Cell Cancer: A Propensity Score Analysis (REPART Study—UroCCR 71)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The use of TA has been described as a treatment option after a variety of RCC treatments. Brassier et al reported lower complication rates and similar disease recurrence, local recurrence and distant metastasis when comparing TA (n=42) versus surgical resection (n=39) in 81 patients with isolated local recurrence after partial nephrectomy [24].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…The use of TA has been described as a treatment option after a variety of RCC treatments. Brassier et al reported lower complication rates and similar disease recurrence, local recurrence and distant metastasis when comparing TA (n=42) versus surgical resection (n=39) in 81 patients with isolated local recurrence after partial nephrectomy [24].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…The REPART Study-UroCCR71 provided a propensity score-matched analysis of 81 patients treated with either percutaneous ablation or surgical resection for locally recurrent disease following partial nephrectomy, finding no significant difference between treatments in local recurrence or distant metastasis. 6 Conversely, a propensity matched study of cT1a renal masses by Bianchi et al 7 found that ablation was independently associated with disease recurrence on competing risk analysis. Here, 5-y disease-free survival was greater in patients treated with partial nephrectomy (92.8%) than those receiving local ablative treatments (80.5%, P = 0.02).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%