Skip to main content
. 2023 Jul 3;14:122. doi: 10.1007/s12672-023-00741-z

Table 2.

Comparison of patients with low PRFS and patients with high PRFS

Variables Low PRFS
n = 31
High PRFS
n = 25
p Value
Age (years), median (IQR 25–75) 75 (69–80) 81 (76–85) 0.0094*
Male 16 (51.6) 22 (88.0) 0.0037*
BMI (kg/m2), median (IQR 25–75)  21.9 (20.8–24.0) 23.1 (20.9–25.2) 0.2839
History of pT < 2 bladder cancer 5 (13.5) 4 (21.1) 0.4703
Left 10 (32.3) 18 (72.0) 0.0066*
cT ≥ 3 5 (16.1) 7 (28.0) 0.3376
Positive urine cytology 12(38.7) 9 (36.0) 1.0000
Multiple tumors 1 (3.2) 7 (28.0) 0.0168*
Tumor size ≥ 3 cm 8 (25.8) 10 (40.0) 0.3884
pT ≥ 3 7 (22.6) 10 (40.0) 0.2425
Cancer grade 3 24 (77.4) 16 (64.0) 0.3739
LVI ( +) 8 (25.8) 4 (16.0) 0.5163
INF b, c 21 (67.7) 19 (76.0) 0.5625
Surgical margin ( +) 2 (6.5) 0 (0.0) 0.4968
ASC 4 (12.9) 4 (16.0) 0.7426
Local recurrence 1 (3.2) 0 (0) 1.0000
Distant metastasis 3 (9.7) 7 (28.0) 0.0921

PRFS perirenal fat stranding, IQR interquartile range, BMI body mass index, LVI lymphovascular invasion, INF infiltrative growth, ASC adjuvant systemic chemotherapy

*p < 0.05