Skip to main content
. 2022 Feb 27;11(5):1307. doi: 10.3390/jcm11051307

Table 5.

Linear regression for eGFR changes after surgery.

Variables Univariate Model Multivariable Model b
β ± SE a (95% CI) p β ± SE a (95% CI) p
EA vs. RNU 17.9 ± 4.13 <0.001 12.9 ± 4.92 0.011
Age (per 5 years) −1.12 ± 0.68 0.105
Male vs. Female −16.1 ± 4.33 <0.001 −12.89 ± 4.02 0.002
High grade vs. Low grade −4.10 ± 4.71 0.387
cT1 vs. cTa −8.16 ± 5.32 0.130
Previous/Conc. UC (Yes/No) −3.39 ± 5.44 0.535
Tumor Size (≥3/<3 cm) 8.96 ± 4.70 0.061
Tumor location (RP c/w Ureter/Ureter alone) −6.11 ± 4.67 0.196
Hydronephrosis (Yes vs. No) 4.53 ± 4.81 0.350
Adjuvant IVCT (Yes vs. No) 1.00 ± 10.09 0.922
CIS (Yes vs. No) −8.82 ± 6.96 0.210
Multifocal (Yes vs. No) −19.96 ± 4.69 <0.001 −6.34 ± 5.79 0.278

eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; EA, endoscopic ablation; RNU, radical nephroureterectomy; Conc., concomitant; UC, urothelial carcinoma; c/w, with/without; IVCT, intravesical chemotherapy; CIS, carcinoma in situ. a Weighted by inverse probability of treatment; b Multivariable linear regression analysis of variables (Group variable and p < 0.05 in univariate linear regression).