Results:
Of the patients, 49 (32.5%) were female and 102 (67.5%) were male, with a mean age of 55.9±12.7 years. The mean tumor size was 61.6±34.9 millimeters. Of the patients in our study, 17 (11.3%) had Fuhrman grade 1 tumors, 57 (37.7%) had grade 2, 55 (36.4%) had grade 3, and 22 (14.6%) had Fuhrman grade 4 tumors. The pathological T stages of the patients were as follows: 93 (61.6%) pT1, 16 (10.6%) pT2, 38 (25.2%) pT3, and 4 (2.6%) pT4 (shown in Table 1).
Of the patients, 44 (29.1%) had DM and 62 (41.1%) had HT. The patients in the study had a mean HDL value of 42.4±10.0 mg/dl, a mean TGL value of 146.8±74.8 mg/dl, and a mean BMI value of 28.1±4.1 kg/m2. Of the patients, 88 (68.3%) low HDL, while 62 (41.1%) had elevated TGL. The patients were grouped based on their BMI values, 34 patients (22.5%) were in the normal weight category, 76 patients (50.3%) were in the overweight category, and 41 patients (27.2%) were in the obese category. Forty-one of the patients (27.2%) in the study had MetS (shown in Table 2).
There was a statistically significant difference between the patients with and without MetS in terms of tumor size (p: 0.046) and Fuhrman grade (p: 0.002). The patients with MetS had a larger tumor size and higher Fuhrman grade than those without MetS. There was no statistically significant difference between the patients with and without MetS in terms of pathological T stage (p: 0.104) (shown in Table 3).
Regardless of the antidiabetic treatment received and the regulation of blood glucose, the patients in our study were grouped as patients with a diagnosis of DM and those without DM when they underwent surgery, and the groups were compared for tumor size, grade, and pathological T stage. The patients with DM had a statistically significantly larger tumor size (p: 0.017) and a higher Fuhrman grade (p: 0.005) than those without DM. Since none of the patients in our study had stage 4 DM, the pathological stage correlation between the patients with DM and those without DM could not be analyzed (AUD) (shown in Table 4).
There was a statistically significant difference between the patients with a diagnosis of HT and those without a diagnosis of HT in terms of tumor size (p: 0.007), and pathological T stage (p: 0.007). The patients with HT had a statistically significantly larger tumor size and more advanced stage than those without HT. There was no statistically significant difference between the patients with a diagnosis of HT and those without a diagnosis of HT in terms of Fuhrman tumor grade (p: 0.067) (Table 4).
The patients in our study were grouped based on their dyslipidemia status and, patients with low HDL according to the MetS criteria and those without low HDL and patients with high TGL and those without high TGL were compared. The patients with low HDL had a statistically significantly larger tumor size (p: 0.006), a higher grade (p: 0.012), and a more advanced pathological T stage (p: 0.007) than those with low HDL. The patients with elevated TGL had a statistically significantly larger tumor size (p: 0.003), a worse Fuhrman grade (p: 0.010), and a more advanced pathological T stage (p: 0.010) than those without elevated TGL (shown in Table 5).
In our study, the BMI measurements of the patients when they underwent surgery were used instead of obesity, and the patients were grouped as normal weight, overweight, and obese based on their BMI values. There was a statistically significant difference between the patients grouped in terms of tumor size (p: 0.005) and tumor grade (p: 0.003). Since there were no obese pathological stage 4 patients in the study, the pathological stage correlation between obese patients and non-obese patients could not be evaluated (AUD) (shown in Table 6).