Interobserver Variability in Assessment of Renal Mass Biopsies
Urology Journal,
Vol. 18 No. 04 (2021),
20 September 2021
,
Page 400-403
https://doi.org/10.22037/uj.v18i04.6024
Abstract
Purpose: The main goal of this study was to assess the histopathological efficacy of renal mass biopsy and to check the concordance between pathological results and biopsy of the final specimen, as well as interobserver variability in the assessment of biopsy cores.
Materials and Methods: A hundred sets of core biopsies of postoperative specimens (renal masses) have been performed. Three core biopsies of the intact specimen had been performed once the kidney with the tumor, or the tumor alone were resected. The urologist aimed to obtain two cores from the peripheral sides of the tumor and one core from its center.
The surgical specimen was evaluated by a single pathologist, whereas biopsy samples were referred to three independent pathologists who were blinded to the final results of the renal mass biopsy.
Results: Nondiagnostic biopsy rates ranged from 13% to 22%. Sensitivity and specificity ranged 83-97% and 97-99% by excluding nondiagnostic results. The concordance between assessment of surgical specimen and biopsy in the Fuhrman grading system ranged 36.5-77.0%, respectively. Interobserver agreement between the three pathologists was substantial or moderate, depending on the tumor subtype. The Krippendorff's alpha coefficient, calculated by excluding the nondiagnostic results, was 0.28 (moderate agreement) for the Fuhrman grading system.
Conclusion: The agreement regarding grading of biopsies between three pathologists ranged from moderate to substantial. Therefore, a team of dedicated uropathologists should be engaged in final diagnosis of renal mass biopsy rather than single one before implementing the proper treatment.
- renal mass biopsy
- renal cell carcinoma
- interobserver variability
How to Cite
References
(1) Ljungberg B, Campbell SC, Choi HY, Jacqmin D, Lee JE, Weikert S, et al. The epidemiology of renal cell carcinoma. EurUrol2011;60:615-621.
(2) Corcoran, A. T., Russo, P., Lowrance, W. T. et al.: A Review of Contemporary Data on Surgically Resected Renal Masses-Benign or Malignant? Urology, 81: 707, 2013
(3) Update on the Diagnosis and Management of Renal Angiomyolipoma. Flum AS, Hamoui N, Said MA, Yang XJ, Casalino DD, McGuire BB, Perry KT, Nadler RB. J Urol 2016 Apr; 195(4P1): 834-846.
(4) Choi, J.E., et al. Comparison of perioperative outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. EurUrol, 2015. 67: 891
(5) Ljungberg B, Bensalah K, Canfield S, et al. EAU guidelines on renalcellcarcinoma: 2014 update. EurUrol2015;67:913–24.
(6) Pierorazio, P.M., et al. Five-year analysis of a multi-institutional prospective clinical trial of delayed intervention and surveillance for small renal masses: the DISSRM registry. EurUrol, 2015. 68: 408. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25698065
(7) Schoots, I.G., et al. Bosniak Classification for Complex Renal Cysts Reevaluated: A Systematic Review. J Urol, 2017. 198: 12.
(8) Mun ̃ oz SR, Bangdiwala SI. Interpretation of Kappa and B statistics measures of agreement. J Appl Statistics 1997, 24:105-11.
(9) Patel HD, Johnson MH, Pierorazio PM, Sozio SM, Sharma R, Iyoha E, Bass EB, Allaf ME. Diagnostic accuracy and risks of biopsy in the diagnosis of a renal mass suspicious for localized renal cell carcinoma: systematic review of the literature. J Urol 2016, 195:1340-1347.
(10) Richard PO, Jewett MA, Tanguay S, Saarela O, Liu ZA, Pouliot F, Kapoor A, Rendon R, Finelli A. Safety, reliability and accuracy of small renal tumour biopsies: results from a multi-institution registry. BJU Int 2016, 119:543-549.
(11) Marconi L, Dabestani S, Lam TB, Hofmann F, Stewart F, Norrie J, Bex A, Bensalah K, Canfield SE, Hora M, Kuczyk MA, Merseburger AS, Mulders PFA, Powles T, Staehler M, Ljungberg B, Volpe A. Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy of percutaneous renal tumour biopsy. Eur Urol2016, 69:660-673.
(12) Kummerlin I., ten Kate F., Smedts F., Horn T., Algaba F., Trias I., de la Rosette J., Laguna M.P. Core Biopsies of Renal Tumors: A Study on Diagnostic Accuracy, Interobserver, and Intraobserver Variability. EurUrol 2008, 53(6):1219-1227.
(13) Leveridge MJ, Finelli A, Kachura JR, Evans A, Chung H, Shiff DA, Fernandes K, Jewett MA. Outcomes of small renal mass needle core biopsy, nondiagnostic percutaneous biopsy, and the role of repeat biopsy. EurUrol2011, 60:578-584.
- Abstract Viewed: 211 times
- 6024/pdf Downloaded: 201 times