Back to Search Start Over

Clinical Impact and Management of Incidental Renal Findings on Pre-TAVI CT Scan from the Urologist's Perspective.

Authors :
Ziewers, Stefanie
Fischer, Nikita Druva
Börner, Jan Hendrik
Kaufmann, Lilly
Tamm, Alexander
Yang, Yang
Jungmann, Florian
Dotzauer, Robert
Sparwasser, Peter
Hoefner, Thomas
Tsaur, Igor
Haferkamp, Axel
Mager, Rene
Source :
Urologia Internationalis; 2024, Vol. 108 Issue 3, p219-225, 7p
Publication Year :
2024

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of the study was to investigate prevalence and impact of incidental renal masses (IRMs) accompanying increasing computed tomography (CT) work-up for symptomatic aortic valve stenosis (sAVS) of the elderly with regard to the relevance of urological consultation for overall survival (OS). Methods: A retrospective analysis of pre-transcatheter aortic-valve implantations (TAVIs) CT scans of patients with sAVS (N = 1,253) harboring IRM was performed for 2014–2019. According to the clinical management, groups 1 (urologic consultation) and 2 (findings ignored) were formed and analyzed in terms of OS. Results: The prevalence of IRM was 9% (119/1,253). In 19% (23/119), urological advice was sought (group 1). At baseline, group 1 showed a significantly higher rate of malignancy-specific lesions compared to 2 (p < 0.01). Other clinical parameters (e.g., age, cardiological scores, comorbidities) did not differ between groups (p > 0.05). In group 1, 4 (17%) findings were histologically confirmed, of which 3 (13%) underwent surgery. There was no significant difference in median OS at a median follow-up of 24.7 months between groups 1 and 2 with 35.7 (95% CI, 5.9; 65.4) and 47.4 months (95% CI, 33.0; 61.7), respectively (p = 0.4). In Cox regression analysis, chronic kidney disease but not urologic work-up or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or heart failure emerged as an independent unfavorable predictor of OS (HR 2.44, 95% CI 1.37; 4.36, p = 0.003). Conclusion: For the first time, a TAVI population with IRM was analyzed from the urologist's perspective. Urologic co-evaluation and work-up does not confer a significant benefit in terms of OS in this particular population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
00421138
Volume :
108
Issue :
3
Database :
Complementary Index
Journal :
Urologia Internationalis
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
177720188
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1159/000537808