4.5 Article

Evaluation of Nephron-Sparing Surgery as Potential Risk Factor for Relapse in Unilateral Wilms Tumor

Journal

JOURNAL OF SURGICAL RESEARCH
Volume 247, Issue -, Pages 21-27

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2019.11.001

Keywords

Wilms tumor; Relapse; Risk factors; Nephron-sparing surgery; Outcome

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The aim of the study was to assess the prognostic significance of nephron-sparing surgery (NSS) without tumor size limits as a risk factor for relapse in children with unilateral Wilms Tumor (WT). Methods: A 28-y retrospective single-center review was performed. Prognostic relevance of age, gender, stage, histology, nephrectomy (N), and NSS was analyzed. Results: Sixty-nine cases (42 females and 27 males) with WT, off-therapy from 21 to 325 mo after chemotherapy mainly based on the International Society of Pediatric Oncology trials, were treated at our institution. Five cases were excluded (three children with synchronous bilateral WT and two adults with unilateral WT). Of 64 children with unilateral WT, 51 underwent N and 13 NSS without tumor size limits. Indeed, two-thirds of children who underwent NSS presented with a tumor diameter >4 cm. Overall, nine patients (14%) had a relapse (male-to-female ratio = 1:8). Initial surgery was N in eight cases and NSS in another one. Relapse rates in N and NSS groups were 15.7% and 7.7% (P = nonsignificant), respectively; the relapse rates in N and NSS groups were 8.6% and 7.7% (P = nonsignificant) for stages I-II unilateral WT cohort, respectively. On univariate analysis, factors correlated with probability of relapse were unfavorable histology (P < 0.002) and stage III disease (P < 0.01). Conclusions: In unilateral WT, NSS, whenever feasible, does not seem to increase the risk of recurrence. A multicenter prospective trial is required to carefully evaluate this risk. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available