Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Eur Urol. 2016 Apr;69(4):660-673. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.072. Epub 2015 Aug 29.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy of Percutaneous Renal Tumour Biopsy.

Author information

1
Department of Urology, Coimbra University Hospital, Coimbra, Portugal.
2
Department of Urology, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.
3
Academic Urology Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
4
Department of Urology, Sunderby Hospital, Sunderby, Sweden.
5
Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, UK.
6
Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
7
Department of Urology, University of Rennes, Rennes, France.
8
Division of Urology, University of Texas Medical School at Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
9
Department of Urology, Faculty Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic.
10
Department of Urology and Urologic Oncology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
11
Department of Urology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany.
12
Department of Urology, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
13
Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, St. Bartholomew's Hospital, London, UK.
14
Department of Urology, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, Germany.
15
Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Urology and Andrology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
16
Division of Urology, Maggiore della Carità Hospital, University of Eastern Piedmont, Novara, Italy. Electronic address: alessandro.volpe@med.uniupo.it.

Abstract

CONTEXT:

The role of percutaneous renal tumour biopsy (RTB) remains controversial due to uncertainties regarding its diagnostic accuracy and safety.

OBJECTIVE:

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the safety and accuracy of percutaneous RTB for the diagnosis of malignancy, histologic tumour subtype, and grade.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION:

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies providing data on diagnostic accuracy and complications of percutaneous core biopsy (CB) or fine-needle aspiration (FNA) of renal tumours. A meta-analysis was performed to obtain pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity for diagnosis of malignancy. The Cohen kappa coefficient (κ) was estimated for the analysis of histotype/grade concordance between diagnosis on RTB and surgical specimen. Risk of bias assessment was performed (QUADAS-2).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS:

A total of 57 studies recruiting 5228 patients were included. The overall median diagnostic rate of RTB was 92%. The sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic CBs and FNAs were 99.1% and 99.7%, and 93.2% and 89.8%, respectively. A good (κ = 0.683) and a fair (κ = 0.34) agreement were observed between histologic subtype and Fuhrman grade on RTB and surgical specimen, respectively. A very low rate of Clavien ≥ 2 complications was reported. Study limitations included selection and differential-verification bias.

CONCLUSIONS:

RTB is safe and has a high diagnostic yield in experienced centres. Both CB and FNA have good accuracy for the diagnosis of malignancy and histologic subtype, with better performance for CB. The accuracy for Fuhrman grade is fair. Overall, the quality of the evidence was moderate. Prospective cohort studies recruiting consecutive patients and using homogeneous reference standards are required.

PATIENT SUMMARY:

We systematically reviewed the literature to assess the safety and diagnostic performance of renal tumour biopsy (RTB). The results suggest that RTB has good accuracy in diagnosing renal cancer and its subtypes, and it appears to be safe. However, the quality of evidence was moderate, and better quality studies are required to provide a more definitive answer.

KEYWORDS:

Accuracy; Diagnosis; Fine-needle aspiration; Meta-analysis; Needle core biopsy; Renal cell carcinoma; Renal mass

PMID:
26323946
DOI:
10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.072
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center