Amaç: Böbrek tümörlerinde tümör boyutu uygulanacak tedaviyi belirlemede önemli bir important prognostic factor in determining the treprognostik faktördür. Çalışmamızda renal hücreatment. In our study, the difference between radiogli kanser nedeniyle cerrahi uygulanan hastalarda raphic tumor size (RTS) and pathologic tumor size radyolojik tümör boyutu (RTB) ve patolojik tümör (PTS) in patients who undergoing surgery for renal boyutu (PTB) arasındaki fark araştırılmıştır. Histolojik alt tiplere göre de karşılaştırma yapılmıştır.Gereç ve Yöntemler: Eylül 2010 ile Mart 2015 tarihleri arasında renal hücreli kanser nedeni ile cerrahi yapılan 105 olgu retrospektif olarak değerlendirildi. Olguların yaş, cinsiyet, cerrahi prosedür şekli, patolojik T evresi, radyolojik ve patolojik September 2010 and March 2015. Baseline charactümör boyutları, tümörün lokalizasyonu ve histeristics of patients such as age, sex, type of surgery, topatolojik özellikleri kaydedildi. Radyolojik ve pathological T stage, RTS and PTS, tumor location patolojik tümör boyutları, histolojik alt tipler ve and histologic subtype were investigated. Radiogradyolojik tetkikler karşılaştırıldı. Sonuçların istatistiksel analizleri Pearson ki-kare testiyle yapıldı. Bulgular: Çalışmaya alınan olguların ortalama RTB 40.1 mm (19-150 mm) hesaplanırken, square test.PTB ise 42.3 mm (12-180 mm) olarak bulundu. Tümör boyutlarına göre olguları gruplandırdığımızda, PTB 4 cm'nin altındaki olgularda istatistiksel olarak anlamlı sonuç bulunmuştur (p< 0.05). according to tumor size, PTS
Objective: Tumor size in kidney tumor is an important prognostic factor in determining the treatment. In our study, the difference between radiographic tumor size (RTS) and pathologic tumor size (PTS) in patients who undergoing surgery for renal cell carcinoma has been investigated. The comparison has been also made according to histological subtypes. Materials and Methods: One hundred and five patients who undergoing surgery due to renal cell carcinomas were evaluated retrospectively between September 2010 and March 2015. Baseline characteristics of patients such as age, sex, type of surgery, pathological T stage, RTS and PTS, tumor location and histologic subtype were investigated. Radiographic and pathologic tumor size, histological subtypes and radiological examinations were compared. Statistical analysis was performed by Pearson's chisquare test. Results: For all patients, the mean RTS and PTS was 40.1 mm (19-150 mm) and 42.3 mm (12- 180 mm), respectively. When we grouped patients according to tumor size, PTS <4 cm cases had significant statistically results (p <0.05). For a PTS of 4-7 cm, the mean RTS was smaller than the mean PTS (47.4 ve 55.7 mm, p=0.35), however for a PTS > 7 cm patients had similar results (86.9 ve 91.2 mm, p=0.15). Among patients with clear cell carcinomas, the mean RTS was significantly larger than the mean PTS (39.7 mm and 38.9 mm, p<0.05 respectively), not for non clear cell group (38.1 mm and 48.9 mm, p=0.4 respectively). Conclusion: Renal tumors can be high measured radiologically, especially the tumor size is <4 cm. low measured when renal masses are > 4cm. So it should not be decided choice of nephron sparing surgery or radical nephrectomy just looking at the tumor size.
Robson CJ. Radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 1963;89:37-42.
Uzzo RG, Novick AC. Nephron sparing surgery for re- nal tumors: indications, techniques and outcomes. J Urol 2001;166:6-18.
Jeffery NN, Douek N, Guo DY, Patel MI. Discrepancy bet- ween radiological and pathological size of renal masses. BMC Urol 2011;11:2.
Tonyali S, Yazici S. Minimal invasive management of small renal masses: state of art and new trends. J Clin Anal Med 2015; DOI: 10.4328/JCAM.3615.
Butler BP, Novick AC, Miller DP, Campbell SA, Licht MR. Management of small unilateral renal cell carcinomas: ra- dical versus nephron-sparings surgery. Urology 1995;45:34- 40.
Lerner SE, Hawkins CA, Blute ML et al. Disease outcome in patients with low stage renal cell carcinoma treated with nephron sparing or radical surgery. J Urol 1996;155:1868- 73.
Kurta JM, Thompson RH, Kundu S et al. Contempo- rary imaging of patients with a renal mass: does size on computed tomography equal pathological size? BJU Int 2009;103:24-7.
Kathrins M, Caesar S, Mucksavage P, Guzzo T. Renal mass size: concordance between pathology and radiology. Curr Opin Urol 2013;23:389-93
Schlomer B, Figenshau RS, Yan Y, Bhayani SB. How does the radiographic size of a renal mass compare with the pat- hologic size? Urology 2006;68:292-5.
Choi SM, Choi DK, Kim TH et al. A Comparison of Radio- logic Tumor Volume and Pathologic Tumor Volume in Re- nal Cell Carcinoma (RCC). PLoS One 2015;10:e0122019.
Reznek RH. CT/MRI in staging renal cell carcinoma. Can- cer Imaging. 2004;4 Spec No A:S25-32.
Godley PA, Stinchcombe TE. Renal cell carcinoma. Curr Opin Oncol 1999;11:213-7.
Guidelines on Renal carcinoma. European Association of Urology Guidelines. 2010
Budak S, Sağlam HS, Köse O, Kumsar Ş, Adsan Ö. Böbrek Hücreli Karsinomada Radyolojik Tümör Boyutu İle Pato- lojik Boyutun İlişkisi. Sakaryam 2013;3:186-9
Nazim SM, Ather MH, Hafeez K, Salam B. Accuracy of multidetector CT scans in staging of renal carcinoma. Int J Surg 2011;9:86-90.
Herr HW. Radiographic vs surgical size of renal tumours after partial nephrectomy. BJU Int 2000;85:19-21.
Irani J, Humbert M, Lecocq B et al. Renal tumor size: com- parison between computed tomography and surgical mea- surements. Eur Urol 2001;39:300-3.
Ateş F, Akyol I, Sildiroglu O et al. Preoperative imaging in renal masses: does size on computed tomography correlate with actual tumor size? Int Urol Nephrol 2010;42:861-6.
Choi JY, Kim BS, Kim TH, Yoo ES, Kwon TG. Correlation between Radiologic and Pathologic Tumor Size in Locali- zed Renal Cell Carcinoma. Korean J Urol 2010;51:161-4.
Yaycioglu O, Rutman MP, Balasubramaniam M, Peters KM, Gonzalez JA. Clinical and pathologic tumor size in renal cell carcinoma; difference, correlation, and analysis of the influencing factors. Urology 2002;60:33-8.