Radiofrequency ablation versus partial nephrectomy for the treatment of clinical stage 1 renal masses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Over the past two decades,the clinical presentation of renal masses has evolved,where the rising incidence of small renal masses (SRMs) and concomitant minimal invasive treatments have led to noteworthy changes in paradigm of kidney cancer.This study was to perform a proportional meta-ana...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Chinese medical journal 2014, Vol.127 (13), p.2497-2503
Hauptverfasser: Wang, Shangqian, Qin, Chao, Peng, Zhihang, Cao, Qiang, Li, Pu, Shao, Pengfei, Ju, Xiaobing, Meng, Xiaoxin, Lu, Qiang, Li, Jie, Wang, Meilin, Zhang, Zhengdong, Gu, Min, Zhang, Wei, Yin, Changjun
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2503
container_issue 13
container_start_page 2497
container_title Chinese medical journal
container_volume 127
creator Wang, Shangqian
Qin, Chao
Peng, Zhihang
Cao, Qiang
Li, Pu
Shao, Pengfei
Ju, Xiaobing
Meng, Xiaoxin
Lu, Qiang
Li, Jie
Wang, Meilin
Zhang, Zhengdong
Gu, Min
Zhang, Wei
Yin, Changjun
description Background Over the past two decades,the clinical presentation of renal masses has evolved,where the rising incidence of small renal masses (SRMs) and concomitant minimal invasive treatments have led to noteworthy changes in paradigm of kidney cancer.This study was to perform a proportional meta-analysis of observational studies on perioperative complications and oncological outcomes of partial nephrectomy (PN) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA).Methods The US National Library of Medicine's life science database (Medline) and the Web of Science were exhaustly searched before August 1,2013.Clinical stage 1 SRMs that were treated with PN or RFA were included,and perioperative complications and oncological outcomes of a total of 9 565 patients were analyzed.Results Patients who underwent RFA were significantly older (P <0.001).In the subanalysis of stage T1 tumors,the major complication rate of PN was greater than that of RFA (laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN)/robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN):7.2%,open partial nephrectomy (OPN):7.9%,RFA:3.1%,both P <0.001).Minor complications occurred more frequently after RFA (RFA:13.8%,LPN/RPN:7.5%,OPN:9.5%,both P <0.001).By multivariate analysis,the relative risks for minor complications of RFA,compared with LPN and OPN,were 1.7-fold and 1.5-fold greater (both P <0.01),respectively.Patients treated with RFA had a greater local progression rate than those treated by PN (RFA:4.6%,LPN/RPN:1.2%,OPN:1.9%,both P <0.001).By multivariate analysis,the local tumor progression for RFA versus LPN/RPN and OPN were 4.5-fold and 3.1-fold greater,respectively (both P <0.001).Conclusions The current data illustrate that both PN and RFA are viable strategies for the treatment of SRMs.Compared with PN,RFA showed a greater risk of local tumor progression but a lower major complication rate,which is considered better for poor candidates.PN is with no doubt the golden treatment for SRMs,and LPN has been widely accepted as the first option for nephron-sparing surgery by experienced urologists.RFA may be the best option for select patients with significant comorbidity.
doi_str_mv 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0366-6999.20132779
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>wanfang_jour_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_wanfang_journals_zhcmj201413019</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cqvip_id>661683501</cqvip_id><wanfj_id>zhcmj201413019</wanfj_id><sourcerecordid>zhcmj201413019</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-1a53c77df22f825638ccffae5dbea64a58be8d61cad7e04709046a92b101f283</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kVuK2zAUhk1p6aTTbqGIQktfnEqyJdsPfSjD9AIDhTLv4lg-ShRsOaOjzJAuoguYtXRP3UIVksyTOOg7F_6vKN4LvqwazT_ZCZabpScKS15pXequ65aSi0o2TfesWEhVy1LpWjwvFk_ARfGKaMO5VKrRL4sLWXetUp1YFH9-weBnF_Fuh8HuGfQjJD8Hdo-RdsS2EJOHkQXcriPaNE975ubI0hpZighpwpDY7JgdffA2k5RghUywiCFXExAh_fv7yIDRnhJOebzNn_ceHxiEgU2YoITM7snT6-KFg5Hwzem9LG6_Xt9efS9vfn77cfXlprR11aZSgKps0wxOStdKpavWWucA1dAj6BpU22M7aGFhaJDXDe94raGTveDCyba6LD4cxz5AcBBWZjPvYj6BzO-1nTY5zlpUXHQZ_HgEt3HOCVEykyeL4wgB5x0ZkdPWOcyKZ_TzEbVxJorozDb6CeLeCG4O6kxWZzbmoM4czJiDGXNWl_vfnlbt-gmHp-6zqwy8Oy1Yz2F15_PZZ0ZrodtK5VH_AcF9qDg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1542649830</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Radiofrequency ablation versus partial nephrectomy for the treatment of clinical stage 1 renal masses: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Wang, Shangqian ; Qin, Chao ; Peng, Zhihang ; Cao, Qiang ; Li, Pu ; Shao, Pengfei ; Ju, Xiaobing ; Meng, Xiaoxin ; Lu, Qiang ; Li, Jie ; Wang, Meilin ; Zhang, Zhengdong ; Gu, Min ; Zhang, Wei ; Yin, Changjun</creator><creatorcontrib>Wang, Shangqian ; Qin, Chao ; Peng, Zhihang ; Cao, Qiang ; Li, Pu ; Shao, Pengfei ; Ju, Xiaobing ; Meng, Xiaoxin ; Lu, Qiang ; Li, Jie ; Wang, Meilin ; Zhang, Zhengdong ; Gu, Min ; Zhang, Wei ; Yin, Changjun</creatorcontrib><description>Background Over the past two decades,the clinical presentation of renal masses has evolved,where the rising incidence of small renal masses (SRMs) and concomitant minimal invasive treatments have led to noteworthy changes in paradigm of kidney cancer.This study was to perform a proportional meta-analysis of observational studies on perioperative complications and oncological outcomes of partial nephrectomy (PN) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA).Methods The US National Library of Medicine's life science database (Medline) and the Web of Science were exhaustly searched before August 1,2013.Clinical stage 1 SRMs that were treated with PN or RFA were included,and perioperative complications and oncological outcomes of a total of 9 565 patients were analyzed.Results Patients who underwent RFA were significantly older (P <0.001).In the subanalysis of stage T1 tumors,the major complication rate of PN was greater than that of RFA (laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN)/robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN):7.2%,open partial nephrectomy (OPN):7.9%,RFA:3.1%,both P <0.001).Minor complications occurred more frequently after RFA (RFA:13.8%,LPN/RPN:7.5%,OPN:9.5%,both P <0.001).By multivariate analysis,the relative risks for minor complications of RFA,compared with LPN and OPN,were 1.7-fold and 1.5-fold greater (both P <0.01),respectively.Patients treated with RFA had a greater local progression rate than those treated by PN (RFA:4.6%,LPN/RPN:1.2%,OPN:1.9%,both P <0.001).By multivariate analysis,the local tumor progression for RFA versus LPN/RPN and OPN were 4.5-fold and 3.1-fold greater,respectively (both P <0.001).Conclusions The current data illustrate that both PN and RFA are viable strategies for the treatment of SRMs.Compared with PN,RFA showed a greater risk of local tumor progression but a lower major complication rate,which is considered better for poor candidates.PN is with no doubt the golden treatment for SRMs,and LPN has been widely accepted as the first option for nephron-sparing surgery by experienced urologists.RFA may be the best option for select patients with significant comorbidity.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0366-6999</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2542-5641</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0366-6999.20132779</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24985591</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>China: Department of Urology, First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210029, China%Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics ,School of Public Health, Nanjing Medical University,Nanjing, Jiangsu 210029, China</publisher><subject>Catheter Ablation - adverse effects ; Catheter Ablation - methods ; Humans ; Kidney Neoplasms - surgery ; Kidney Neoplasms - therapy ; MEDLINE ; Nephrectomy - adverse effects ; Nephrectomy - methods ; 临床表现 ; 切除术 ; 多因素分析 ; 射频消融 ; 治疗 ; 科学数据库 ; 肾肿瘤</subject><ispartof>Chinese medical journal, 2014, Vol.127 (13), p.2497-2503</ispartof><rights>Copyright © Wanfang Data Co. Ltd. All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-1a53c77df22f825638ccffae5dbea64a58be8d61cad7e04709046a92b101f283</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-1a53c77df22f825638ccffae5dbea64a58be8d61cad7e04709046a92b101f283</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Uhttp://image.cqvip.com/vip1000/qk/85656X/85656X.jpg</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,860,4010,27900,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24985591$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wang, Shangqian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qin, Chao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peng, Zhihang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cao, Qiang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Pu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shao, Pengfei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ju, Xiaobing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meng, Xiaoxin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lu, Qiang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Jie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Meilin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Zhengdong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gu, Min</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Wei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yin, Changjun</creatorcontrib><title>Radiofrequency ablation versus partial nephrectomy for the treatment of clinical stage 1 renal masses: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><title>Chinese medical journal</title><addtitle>Chinese Medical Journal</addtitle><description>Background Over the past two decades,the clinical presentation of renal masses has evolved,where the rising incidence of small renal masses (SRMs) and concomitant minimal invasive treatments have led to noteworthy changes in paradigm of kidney cancer.This study was to perform a proportional meta-analysis of observational studies on perioperative complications and oncological outcomes of partial nephrectomy (PN) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA).Methods The US National Library of Medicine's life science database (Medline) and the Web of Science were exhaustly searched before August 1,2013.Clinical stage 1 SRMs that were treated with PN or RFA were included,and perioperative complications and oncological outcomes of a total of 9 565 patients were analyzed.Results Patients who underwent RFA were significantly older (P <0.001).In the subanalysis of stage T1 tumors,the major complication rate of PN was greater than that of RFA (laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN)/robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN):7.2%,open partial nephrectomy (OPN):7.9%,RFA:3.1%,both P <0.001).Minor complications occurred more frequently after RFA (RFA:13.8%,LPN/RPN:7.5%,OPN:9.5%,both P <0.001).By multivariate analysis,the relative risks for minor complications of RFA,compared with LPN and OPN,were 1.7-fold and 1.5-fold greater (both P <0.01),respectively.Patients treated with RFA had a greater local progression rate than those treated by PN (RFA:4.6%,LPN/RPN:1.2%,OPN:1.9%,both P <0.001).By multivariate analysis,the local tumor progression for RFA versus LPN/RPN and OPN were 4.5-fold and 3.1-fold greater,respectively (both P <0.001).Conclusions The current data illustrate that both PN and RFA are viable strategies for the treatment of SRMs.Compared with PN,RFA showed a greater risk of local tumor progression but a lower major complication rate,which is considered better for poor candidates.PN is with no doubt the golden treatment for SRMs,and LPN has been widely accepted as the first option for nephron-sparing surgery by experienced urologists.RFA may be the best option for select patients with significant comorbidity.</description><subject>Catheter Ablation - adverse effects</subject><subject>Catheter Ablation - methods</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Kidney Neoplasms - surgery</subject><subject>Kidney Neoplasms - therapy</subject><subject>MEDLINE</subject><subject>Nephrectomy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Nephrectomy - methods</subject><subject>临床表现</subject><subject>切除术</subject><subject>多因素分析</subject><subject>射频消融</subject><subject>治疗</subject><subject>科学数据库</subject><subject>肾肿瘤</subject><issn>0366-6999</issn><issn>2542-5641</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNo9kVuK2zAUhk1p6aTTbqGIQktfnEqyJdsPfSjD9AIDhTLv4lg-ShRsOaOjzJAuoguYtXRP3UIVksyTOOg7F_6vKN4LvqwazT_ZCZabpScKS15pXequ65aSi0o2TfesWEhVy1LpWjwvFk_ARfGKaMO5VKrRL4sLWXetUp1YFH9-weBnF_Fuh8HuGfQjJD8Hdo-RdsS2EJOHkQXcriPaNE975ubI0hpZighpwpDY7JgdffA2k5RghUywiCFXExAh_fv7yIDRnhJOebzNn_ceHxiEgU2YoITM7snT6-KFg5Hwzem9LG6_Xt9efS9vfn77cfXlprR11aZSgKps0wxOStdKpavWWucA1dAj6BpU22M7aGFhaJDXDe94raGTveDCyba6LD4cxz5AcBBWZjPvYj6BzO-1nTY5zlpUXHQZ_HgEt3HOCVEykyeL4wgB5x0ZkdPWOcyKZ_TzEbVxJorozDb6CeLeCG4O6kxWZzbmoM4czJiDGXNWl_vfnlbt-gmHp-6zqwy8Oy1Yz2F15_PZZ0ZrodtK5VH_AcF9qDg</recordid><startdate>2014</startdate><enddate>2014</enddate><creator>Wang, Shangqian</creator><creator>Qin, Chao</creator><creator>Peng, Zhihang</creator><creator>Cao, Qiang</creator><creator>Li, Pu</creator><creator>Shao, Pengfei</creator><creator>Ju, Xiaobing</creator><creator>Meng, Xiaoxin</creator><creator>Lu, Qiang</creator><creator>Li, Jie</creator><creator>Wang, Meilin</creator><creator>Zhang, Zhengdong</creator><creator>Gu, Min</creator><creator>Zhang, Wei</creator><creator>Yin, Changjun</creator><general>Department of Urology, First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210029, China%Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics ,School of Public Health, Nanjing Medical University,Nanjing, Jiangsu 210029, China</general><scope>2RA</scope><scope>92L</scope><scope>CQIGP</scope><scope>W91</scope><scope>~WA</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>2B.</scope><scope>4A8</scope><scope>92I</scope><scope>93N</scope><scope>PSX</scope><scope>TCJ</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2014</creationdate><title>Radiofrequency ablation versus partial nephrectomy for the treatment of clinical stage 1 renal masses: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><author>Wang, Shangqian ; Qin, Chao ; Peng, Zhihang ; Cao, Qiang ; Li, Pu ; Shao, Pengfei ; Ju, Xiaobing ; Meng, Xiaoxin ; Lu, Qiang ; Li, Jie ; Wang, Meilin ; Zhang, Zhengdong ; Gu, Min ; Zhang, Wei ; Yin, Changjun</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-1a53c77df22f825638ccffae5dbea64a58be8d61cad7e04709046a92b101f283</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Catheter Ablation - adverse effects</topic><topic>Catheter Ablation - methods</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Kidney Neoplasms - surgery</topic><topic>Kidney Neoplasms - therapy</topic><topic>MEDLINE</topic><topic>Nephrectomy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Nephrectomy - methods</topic><topic>临床表现</topic><topic>切除术</topic><topic>多因素分析</topic><topic>射频消融</topic><topic>治疗</topic><topic>科学数据库</topic><topic>肾肿瘤</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wang, Shangqian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qin, Chao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peng, Zhihang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cao, Qiang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Pu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shao, Pengfei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ju, Xiaobing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meng, Xiaoxin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lu, Qiang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Jie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Meilin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Zhengdong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gu, Min</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Wei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yin, Changjun</creatorcontrib><collection>中文科技期刊数据库</collection><collection>中文科技期刊数据库-CALIS站点</collection><collection>中文科技期刊数据库-7.0平台</collection><collection>中文科技期刊数据库-医药卫生</collection><collection>中文科技期刊数据库- 镜像站点</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Wanfang Data Journals - Hong Kong</collection><collection>WANFANG Data Centre</collection><collection>Wanfang Data Journals</collection><collection>万方数据期刊 - 香港版</collection><collection>China Online Journals (COJ)</collection><collection>China Online Journals (COJ)</collection><jtitle>Chinese medical journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wang, Shangqian</au><au>Qin, Chao</au><au>Peng, Zhihang</au><au>Cao, Qiang</au><au>Li, Pu</au><au>Shao, Pengfei</au><au>Ju, Xiaobing</au><au>Meng, Xiaoxin</au><au>Lu, Qiang</au><au>Li, Jie</au><au>Wang, Meilin</au><au>Zhang, Zhengdong</au><au>Gu, Min</au><au>Zhang, Wei</au><au>Yin, Changjun</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Radiofrequency ablation versus partial nephrectomy for the treatment of clinical stage 1 renal masses: a systematic review and meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>Chinese medical journal</jtitle><addtitle>Chinese Medical Journal</addtitle><date>2014</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>127</volume><issue>13</issue><spage>2497</spage><epage>2503</epage><pages>2497-2503</pages><issn>0366-6999</issn><eissn>2542-5641</eissn><abstract>Background Over the past two decades,the clinical presentation of renal masses has evolved,where the rising incidence of small renal masses (SRMs) and concomitant minimal invasive treatments have led to noteworthy changes in paradigm of kidney cancer.This study was to perform a proportional meta-analysis of observational studies on perioperative complications and oncological outcomes of partial nephrectomy (PN) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA).Methods The US National Library of Medicine's life science database (Medline) and the Web of Science were exhaustly searched before August 1,2013.Clinical stage 1 SRMs that were treated with PN or RFA were included,and perioperative complications and oncological outcomes of a total of 9 565 patients were analyzed.Results Patients who underwent RFA were significantly older (P <0.001).In the subanalysis of stage T1 tumors,the major complication rate of PN was greater than that of RFA (laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN)/robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN):7.2%,open partial nephrectomy (OPN):7.9%,RFA:3.1%,both P <0.001).Minor complications occurred more frequently after RFA (RFA:13.8%,LPN/RPN:7.5%,OPN:9.5%,both P <0.001).By multivariate analysis,the relative risks for minor complications of RFA,compared with LPN and OPN,were 1.7-fold and 1.5-fold greater (both P <0.01),respectively.Patients treated with RFA had a greater local progression rate than those treated by PN (RFA:4.6%,LPN/RPN:1.2%,OPN:1.9%,both P <0.001).By multivariate analysis,the local tumor progression for RFA versus LPN/RPN and OPN were 4.5-fold and 3.1-fold greater,respectively (both P <0.001).Conclusions The current data illustrate that both PN and RFA are viable strategies for the treatment of SRMs.Compared with PN,RFA showed a greater risk of local tumor progression but a lower major complication rate,which is considered better for poor candidates.PN is with no doubt the golden treatment for SRMs,and LPN has been widely accepted as the first option for nephron-sparing surgery by experienced urologists.RFA may be the best option for select patients with significant comorbidity.</abstract><cop>China</cop><pub>Department of Urology, First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210029, China%Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics ,School of Public Health, Nanjing Medical University,Nanjing, Jiangsu 210029, China</pub><pmid>24985591</pmid><doi>10.3760/cma.j.issn.0366-6999.20132779</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0366-6999
ispartof Chinese medical journal, 2014, Vol.127 (13), p.2497-2503
issn 0366-6999
2542-5641
language eng
recordid cdi_wanfang_journals_zhcmj201413019
source MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals
subjects Catheter Ablation - adverse effects
Catheter Ablation - methods
Humans
Kidney Neoplasms - surgery
Kidney Neoplasms - therapy
MEDLINE
Nephrectomy - adverse effects
Nephrectomy - methods
临床表现
切除术
多因素分析
射频消融
治疗
科学数据库
肾肿瘤
title Radiofrequency ablation versus partial nephrectomy for the treatment of clinical stage 1 renal masses: a systematic review and meta-analysis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-30T17%3A47%3A29IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-wanfang_jour_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Radiofrequency%20ablation%20versus%20partial%20nephrectomy%20for%20the%20treatment%20of%20clinical%20stage%201%20renal%20masses%EF%BC%9A%20a%20systematic%20review%20and%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=Chinese%20medical%20journal&rft.au=Wang,%20Shangqian&rft.date=2014&rft.volume=127&rft.issue=13&rft.spage=2497&rft.epage=2503&rft.pages=2497-2503&rft.issn=0366-6999&rft.eissn=2542-5641&rft_id=info:doi/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0366-6999.20132779&rft_dat=%3Cwanfang_jour_proqu%3Ezhcmj201413019%3C/wanfang_jour_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1542649830&rft_id=info:pmid/24985591&rft_cqvip_id=661683501&rft_wanfj_id=zhcmj201413019&rfr_iscdi=true