老年患者的肾部分切除术:系统回顾和比较结果分析。

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Ejso Pub Date : 2024-08-02 DOI:10.1016/j.ejso.2024.108578
{"title":"老年患者的肾部分切除术:系统回顾和比较结果分析。","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ejso.2024.108578","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>The management of renal masses in the elderly population is particularly challenging, as these patients are often more frail and potentially more susceptible to surgical morbidity. This review aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the outcomes of partial nephrectomy (PN) for treating renal masses in elderly individuals.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A systematic electronic literature search was conducted in May 2024 using the Medline (via PubMed) database by searching publications up to April 2024. The population, intervention, comparator, and outcome (PICO) model defined study eligibility. Studies were deemed eligible if assessing elderly patients (aged 70 years or older) (P) undergoing PN (I) with or without comparison between a different population (non-elderly) or a different treatment option (radical nephrectomy, ablation or active surveillance) (C) evaluating surgical, functional, and oncological outcomes (O).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 23 retrospective studies investigating the role of PN in elderly patients were finally included. PN emerged as a safe procedure also for older patients, demonstrating good outcomes. Preoperative evaluation of frailty status emerged to be paramount. Age alone was discredited as the sole reason to reject the use of PN. The main limitation is the retrospective nature of included studies and the lack of the assessment of elderly patients’ frailty.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The surgical treatment of renal masses in older patients is a challenging scenario. PN should be chosen over RN whenever possible since it can better preserve renal function. The use of minimally invasive techniques should be favored in this extremely fragile group of patients.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":11522,"journal":{"name":"Ejso","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Partial nephrectomy in elderly patients: a systematic review and analysis of comparative outcomes\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ejso.2024.108578\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>The management of renal masses in the elderly population is particularly challenging, as these patients are often more frail and potentially more susceptible to surgical morbidity. This review aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the outcomes of partial nephrectomy (PN) for treating renal masses in elderly individuals.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A systematic electronic literature search was conducted in May 2024 using the Medline (via PubMed) database by searching publications up to April 2024. The population, intervention, comparator, and outcome (PICO) model defined study eligibility. Studies were deemed eligible if assessing elderly patients (aged 70 years or older) (P) undergoing PN (I) with or without comparison between a different population (non-elderly) or a different treatment option (radical nephrectomy, ablation or active surveillance) (C) evaluating surgical, functional, and oncological outcomes (O).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 23 retrospective studies investigating the role of PN in elderly patients were finally included. PN emerged as a safe procedure also for older patients, demonstrating good outcomes. Preoperative evaluation of frailty status emerged to be paramount. Age alone was discredited as the sole reason to reject the use of PN. The main limitation is the retrospective nature of included studies and the lack of the assessment of elderly patients’ frailty.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The surgical treatment of renal masses in older patients is a challenging scenario. PN should be chosen over RN whenever possible since it can better preserve renal function. The use of minimally invasive techniques should be favored in this extremely fragile group of patients.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11522,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ejso\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ejso\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0748798324006309\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ejso","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0748798324006309","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:老年人群肾脏肿块的治疗尤其具有挑战性,因为这些患者通常更加虚弱,可能更容易发生手术并发症。本综述旨在全面分析肾部分切除术(PN)治疗老年人肾肿块的效果:方法:2024 年 5 月,我们使用 Medline(通过 PubMed)数据库对截至 2024 年 4 月的出版物进行了系统的电子文献检索。根据人群、干预、比较者和结果(PICO)模型确定研究资格。如果研究评估的是接受 PN 治疗的老年患者(70 岁或以上)(P)(I),并与不同人群(非老年人)或不同治疗方案(根治性肾切除术、消融术或主动监测)(C)进行比较(O),评估手术、功能和肿瘤学结果(O),则该研究符合条件:结果:最终共纳入了 23 项调查 PN 在老年患者中作用的回顾性研究。对老年患者而言,PN 也是一种安全的手术,并显示出良好的疗效。术前对虚弱状态的评估至关重要。年龄本身并不能作为拒绝使用 PN 的唯一理由。研究的主要局限性在于所纳入研究的回顾性以及缺乏对老年患者体弱状况的评估:结论:老年患者肾肿块的手术治疗具有挑战性。在可能的情况下,应选择 PN 而不是 RN,因为它能更好地保护肾功能。对于这类极度脆弱的患者,应更倾向于使用微创技术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Partial nephrectomy in elderly patients: a systematic review and analysis of comparative outcomes

Purpose

The management of renal masses in the elderly population is particularly challenging, as these patients are often more frail and potentially more susceptible to surgical morbidity. This review aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the outcomes of partial nephrectomy (PN) for treating renal masses in elderly individuals.

Methods

A systematic electronic literature search was conducted in May 2024 using the Medline (via PubMed) database by searching publications up to April 2024. The population, intervention, comparator, and outcome (PICO) model defined study eligibility. Studies were deemed eligible if assessing elderly patients (aged 70 years or older) (P) undergoing PN (I) with or without comparison between a different population (non-elderly) or a different treatment option (radical nephrectomy, ablation or active surveillance) (C) evaluating surgical, functional, and oncological outcomes (O).

Results

A total of 23 retrospective studies investigating the role of PN in elderly patients were finally included. PN emerged as a safe procedure also for older patients, demonstrating good outcomes. Preoperative evaluation of frailty status emerged to be paramount. Age alone was discredited as the sole reason to reject the use of PN. The main limitation is the retrospective nature of included studies and the lack of the assessment of elderly patients’ frailty.

Conclusions

The surgical treatment of renal masses in older patients is a challenging scenario. PN should be chosen over RN whenever possible since it can better preserve renal function. The use of minimally invasive techniques should be favored in this extremely fragile group of patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ejso
Ejso 医学-外科
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
2.60%
发文量
1148
审稿时长
41 days
期刊介绍: JSO - European Journal of Surgical Oncology ("the Journal of Cancer Surgery") is the Official Journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and BASO ~ the Association for Cancer Surgery. The EJSO aims to advance surgical oncology research and practice through the publication of original research articles, review articles, editorials, debates and correspondence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信