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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Chinese medical journal 2014, Vol.127 (13), p.2497-2503 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
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 |