Comparing Radiological and Pathological Sizes of Renal Tumors
Author Information
Author(s): Jeffery Nicola N, Douek Norbert, Guo Ding Y, Patel Manish I
Primary Institution: Royal Prince Alfred Hospital
Hypothesis
Is there a discrepancy between radiological and pathological measurements of renal tumor size?
Conclusion
CT overestimated the pathological size of renal tumors by a statistically significant but small amount of 3.1 mm.
Supporting Evidence
- CT overestimated pathological size in 58.6% of patients.
- Discrepancies in staging occurred in 29% of patients with pT1 or pT2 tumors.
- Fuhrman grade positively correlated with both radiological tumor size and pathological T stage.
Takeaway
Doctors use pictures from CT scans to guess how big kidney tumors are, but sometimes they guess too big. This can change how they treat patients.
Methodology
The study compared radiological tumor size on CT with pathological size in 157 patients using paired Student's t-test.
Potential Biases
There was no centralized review of measurements by a single radiologist or pathologist.
Limitations
The study is retrospective and from a single institution, with small numbers for some histological subtypes.
Participant Demographics
The cohort included 51 women (32.5%) and 106 men (67.5%), with a mean age of 63.3 years.
Statistical Information
P-Value
0.012
Confidence Interval
95% CI: 0.7 to 5.5 mm
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website