1
|
Miki J, Fukuokaya W, Taoka R, Saito R, Matsui Y, Hatakeyama S, Kawahara T, Matsuda A, Kawai T, Kato M, Sazuka T, Sano T, Urabe F, Kashima S, Naito H, Murakami Y, Nishiyama N, Nishiyama H, Kitamura H, Kimura T. Oncological outcomes of prophylactic urethrectomy at the time of radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: A nationwide multi-institutional study. Int J Urol 2024; 31:1009-1016. [PMID: 38822533 DOI: 10.1111/iju.15505] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2024] [Accepted: 05/19/2024] [Indexed: 06/03/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To determine the effects of prophylactic urethrectomy (PU) on oncological and perioperative outcomes in patients with bladder cancer (BC) undergoing radical cystectomy (RC). METHODS This retrospective study analyzed data on 1976 evaluable patients with BC who underwent RC. Patients were drawn from 36 institutions within the Japanese Urological Oncology Group. Oncological outcomes were compared using restricted mean survival times (RMSTs) based on inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)-adjusted Kaplan-Meier curves for non-urinary tract recurrence-free survival (NUTRFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS). Interaction terms within IPTW-adjusted Cox regression models were examined to assess the heterogeneity of treatment effect based on the risk of urethral recurrence (UR). The association between PU, estimated blood loss (EBL), and the incidence of severe postoperative surgical complications (SPSCs) (Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher) was analyzed. RESULTS Of 1976 patients, 1448 (73.3%) received PU. IPTW adjustment was used to balance baseline characteristics between the treatment groups. Within the 107-month window of patient monitoring, PU showed no survival benefits (NUTRFS difference: 0.2 months [95% confidence interval: -6.8 to 7.3]; CSS, 1.2 [-4.9 to 7.3]; OS, 0 [-6.5 to 6.5]). No significant interactions were observed with factors associated with UR, and PU was associated with unfavorable perioperative outcomes (EBL, 1179 mL vs. 983 mL; SPSC, 14.6% vs. 7.0%). CONCLUSIONS This study showed that (1) PU was not associated with survival in patients with BC undergoing RC, regardless of UR-associated factors, and (2) PU was associated with unfavorable perioperative outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jun Miki
- Department of Urology, Jikei University Kashiwa Hospital, Chiba, Japan
- Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Wataru Fukuokaya
- Department of Urology, Jikei University Kashiwa Hospital, Chiba, Japan
- Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Rikiya Taoka
- Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Kagawa University, Kagawa, Japan
| | - Ryoichi Saito
- Department of Urology, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
| | - Yoshiyuki Matsui
- Department of Urology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Shingo Hatakeyama
- Department of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, Aomori, Japan
| | - Takashi Kawahara
- Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan
| | - Ayumu Matsuda
- Department of Urology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Taketo Kawai
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
- Department of Urology, Teikyo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Minoru Kato
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka Metropolitan University, Osaka, Japan
| | - Tomokazu Sazuka
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan
| | - Takeshi Sano
- Department of Urology, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
| | - Fumihiko Urabe
- Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Soki Kashima
- Department of Urology, Akita University Graduate School of Medicine, Akita, Japan
| | - Hirohito Naito
- Department of Urology, Kurashiki Central Hospital, Okayama, Japan
| | - Yoji Murakami
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Life Science, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan
| | - Naotaka Nishiyama
- Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toyama, Toyama, Japan
| | - Hiroyuki Nishiyama
- Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan
| | - Hiroshi Kitamura
- Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toyama, Toyama, Japan
| | - Takahiro Kimura
- Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hattori Y, Nagoshi A, Fujiwara T, Kambe T, Mine Y, Hagimoto H, Abe Y, Yamashita D, Tsutsumi N, Shibasaki N, Yamasaki T, Kawakita M. Safety of urethral preservation using urethral frozen section analysis in radical cystectomy. BJUI COMPASS 2024; 5:806-810. [PMID: 39157162 PMCID: PMC11327487 DOI: 10.1002/bco2.377] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2024] [Revised: 04/11/2024] [Accepted: 05/07/2024] [Indexed: 08/20/2024] Open
Abstract
Background The objective of this study is to assess whether urethral preservation can be performed safely using frozen section analysis (FSA) of the urethral stump on urethral recurrence after radical cystectomy. Methods Between June 2012 and July 2022, we investigated consecutive male patients who underwent urethral FSA during radical cystectomy for urothelial carcinoma. For FSA-abnormal cases, urethrectomy was performed, and for FSA-normal cases, the urethra was preserved. The diagnostic accuracy of FSA was assessed in comparison with the pathological findings of the permanent sections of the same tissue. Postoperatively, computed tomography and urinary cytology were performed as routine surveillance of recurrence. Results Of the 77 patients included in this study, three patients with abnormal FSA underwent concurrent urethrectomy. The negative predictive value of urethral FSA was 100%. With a median postoperative follow-up of 38 months (interquartile ranges 21-71), no urethral recurrence was observed. Conclusions FSA may be useful in determining the indication for urethrectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuto Hattori
- Department of UrologyKobe City Medical Centre General HospitalKobeJapan
| | - Akihiko Nagoshi
- Department of UrologyKobe City Medical Centre General HospitalKobeJapan
| | - Tasuku Fujiwara
- Department of UrologyKobe City Medical Centre General HospitalKobeJapan
| | - Takanari Kambe
- Department of UrologyKobe City Medical Centre General HospitalKobeJapan
| | - Yuta Mine
- Department of UrologyKobe City Medical Centre General HospitalKobeJapan
| | - Hiroki Hagimoto
- Department of UrologyKobe City Medical Centre General HospitalKobeJapan
| | - Yohei Abe
- Department of UrologyKobe City Medical Centre General HospitalKobeJapan
| | - Daisuke Yamashita
- Department of PathologyKobe City Medical Centre General HospitalKobeJapan
| | - Naofumi Tsutsumi
- Department of UrologyKobe City Medical Centre General HospitalKobeJapan
| | - Noboru Shibasaki
- Department of UrologyKobe City Medical Centre General HospitalKobeJapan
| | | | - Mutsushi Kawakita
- Department of UrologyKobe City Medical Centre General HospitalKobeJapan
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Zennami K, Sumitomo M, Nukaya T, Takenaka M, Ichino M, Takahara K, Sasaki H, Kusaka M, Shiroki R. Impact of Urethra-Preserving Surgery During Radical Cystectomy: An Optimal Urethral Management in the Robotic Era. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2024; 22:102146. [PMID: 39043553 DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102146] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/29/2024] [Revised: 05/07/2024] [Accepted: 06/23/2024] [Indexed: 07/25/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The optimal indication and survival benefits of prophylactic urethrectomy (PU) during radical cystectomy remain unclear. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the impact of urethra-preserving surgery (UPS) on oncological outcome including its recurrence patterns, and to establish an optimal urethral management strategy with a novel UPS technique in the robotic era. PATIENTS AND METHODS We retrospectively analyzed 281 male patients with bladder cancer who received radical cystectomy (RC) (115 with and 166 without PU) at our institutions between 2010 and 2023. Subsequently, perioperative and oncological outcomes were assessed between propensity score-matched cohorts. RESULTS Urethral recurrence (UR) occurred in 5 patients (5/166, 3.0%), all of whom underwent open-RC. Three among those (1.8%) with concomitant metastasis were died of cancer. There were no statistically significant differences between the PU and UPS groups in urethral-recurrence free survival (urethral-RFS) (P = .14), local-RFS (P = .59) and overall survival (OS) (P = .84) in the entire cohort. However, the UPS group showed significantly worse urethral-RFS (P = .008), local-RFS (P = .005) and OS (P = .03) in patients with high-risk of UR. Analysis of recurrence patterns revealed that UPS in high-risk patients significantly increased local recurrence (25.8% vs. 5.0%, P = .02). Conversely, a novel robotic-UPS technique demonstrated significantly favorable perioperative outcomes, comparable local-RFS (P = .79) and OS (P = .16) without UR (0/134, 0%) when compared to robotic-PU. Robotic-UPS also exhibited significantly better local-RFS (P =.007) and OS (P < .001) than open-UPS. CONCLUSIONS UR-related death was rare and PU did not show a survival benefit for the entire cohort. However, inappropriate UPS in patients at high-risk of UR may increase local recurrence which might be responsible for poor survival after UPS rather than disease progression derived from UR. The robotic-UPS has the potential to reduce unnecessary PU, urethral and local recurrence without compromising survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kenji Zennami
- Department of Urology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan.
| | - Makoto Sumitomo
- Department of Urology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan
| | - Takuhisa Nukaya
- Department of Urology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan
| | - Masashi Takenaka
- Department of Urology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan
| | - Manabu Ichino
- Department of Urology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan
| | - Kiyoshi Takahara
- Department of Urology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan
| | - Hitomi Sasaki
- Department of Urology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan
| | - Mamoru Kusaka
- Department of Urology, Fujita Health University Okazaki Medical Center, Okazaki, Japan
| | - Ryoichi Shiroki
- Department of Urology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Yu J, Lee CU, Chung JH, Song W, Kang M, Jeon HG, Jeong BC, Seo SI, Jeon SS, Sung HH. Impact of urinary diversion type on urethral recurrence following radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: propensity score matched and weighted analyses of retrospective cohort. Int J Surg 2024; 110:700-708. [PMID: 38000052 PMCID: PMC10871635 DOI: 10.1097/js9.0000000000000904] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2023] [Accepted: 11/03/2023] [Indexed: 11/26/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The absence of randomized controlled trials and the presence of inherent selection bias in existing studies have led to ongoing uncertainty regarding the impact of urinary diversion (UD) type (orthotopic UD or nonorthotopic UD) on urethral recurrence (UR) following radical cystectomy (RC) for bladder cancer. This study aimed to assess the impact of the UD types on UR after RC and to identify predictive factors associated with UR. MATERIALS AND METHODS This retrospective analysis encompassed 612 male patients who underwent RC for urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Among them, 341 patients received nonorthotopic UD [ileal conduit (IC) or ureterocutaneostomy (UC)], whereas 271 received orthotopic neobladder (NB) between January 2012 and October 2022. To mitigate potential biases, we employed 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) and stabilized inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW). Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank tests were employed to assess UR-free survival between the IC/UC and NB groups, while multivariable Cox regression analysis was conducted to determine predictive factors for UR. RESULTS Among the 612 patients included, 33 (5.4%) experienced UR. PSM yielded matched cohort comprising 412 patients, evenly distributed with 206 patients in each group (IC/UC and NB). Clinicopathological data demonstrated similarity between the two groups. Patients who underwent NB exhibited significantly superior UR-free survival in both PSM (log-rank P =0.033) and IPTW cohorts (log-rank P =0.009). NB reconstruction (vs. IC/UC) emerged as a substantial protective factor against UR [hazard ratio (HR) 0.283; 95% CI: 0.088-0.916; P =0.035], whereas prostatic urethral involvement was identified as a significant risk factor (HR 5.328; 95% CI: 1.298-21.868; P =0.020) in the PSM cohort. Additionally, in the IPTW cohort, NB reconstruction (vs. IC/UC) maintained its significance as a protective factor against UR (HR 0.336; 95% CI: 0.131-0.858; P =0.023) along with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.335; 95% CI: 0.116-0.969; P =0.044), whereas prostatic urethral involvement remained a significant risk factor (HR 3.752; 95% CI: 1.484-9.488; P =0.005). CONCLUSIONS Even after mitigating selection bias, NB reconstruction holds a protective effect against UR in male patients undergoing RC for bladder cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Hyun Hwan Sung
- Department of Urology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Truong TTH, Nguyen DKH, Dinh KN, Thai MS. Urethral Recurrence After Cystectomy and Orthotopic Bladder Reconstruction: A Rare Case of Recurrent Bladder Cancer After 12 Years and Review of the Literature. CLINICAL MEDICINE INSIGHTS-CASE REPORTS 2024; 17:11795476231224188. [PMID: 38269148 PMCID: PMC10804922 DOI: 10.1177/11795476231224188] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/19/2023] [Accepted: 12/15/2023] [Indexed: 01/26/2024]
Abstract
Introduction Radical cystectomy combined with orthotopic urinary diversion is a chosen approach for treating invasive bladder cancer. However, urothelial cell carcinoma is characterized by its potential for recurrence and the development of multiple tumors in the urinary tracts. In the natural progression of transitional cell carcinoma, the remaining ureteral stump is considered a predicted site for possible recurrence after radical cystectomy. Currently, there is no specific recommendation for the diagnosis and management of this condition. Objective We report a rare case in a 74-year-old male patient who was diagnosed with anterior urethral carcinoma following a history of radical cystectomy and Hautmann ileal neobladder reconstruction. Additionally, we summarize some novel findings regarding risk factors, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis in patients with recurrent bladder cancer in the urethra after radical cystectomy. Methods A case report and mini review. Results The patient was diagnosed with recurrent bladder cancer in the urethral after radical cystectomy using magnetic resonance imaging of the pelvis, cystoscopy, and biopsy. Complete urethrectomy and creation of a permanent percutaneous urinary diversion were performed. No intraoperative or postoperative complications were recorded. The patient was discharged 3 days after the surgery. Conclusion Urethral cancer following radical cystectomy for bladder cancer treatment is a rare condition. Risk factors for this occurrence include male gender, non-use of orthotopic neobladder reconstruction technique, invasive tumors in the prostatic urethra, and multifocal tumors. The treatment of these tumors can be determined based on the extent of invasion and histological characteristics, leading to the choice between radical urethrectomy or alternative conservative treatments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Ky Nam Dinh
- Pham Ngoc Thach University of Medicine, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
| | - Minh Sam Thai
- Urology Department of Cho Ray Hospital, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
- The University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Prata F, Anceschi U, Taffon C, Rossi SM, Verri M, Iannuzzi A, Ragusa A, Esperto F, Prata SM, Crescenzi A, Scarpa RM, Simone G, Papalia R. Real-Time Urethral and Ureteral Assessment during Radical Cystectomy Using Ex-Vivo Optical Imaging: A Novel Technique for the Evaluation of Fresh Unfixed Surgical Margins. Curr Oncol 2023; 30:3421-3431. [PMID: 36975472 PMCID: PMC10047830 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol30030259] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2023] [Revised: 03/05/2023] [Accepted: 03/08/2023] [Indexed: 03/17/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Our study aims to assess the feasibility and the reproducibility of fluorescent confocal microscopy (FCM) real-time assessment of urethral and ureteral margins during open radical cystectomy (ORC) for bladder cancer (BCa). Methods: From May 2020 to January 2022, 46 patients underwent ORC with intraoperative FCM evaluation. Each specimen was intraoperatively stained for histopathological analysis using FCM, analyzed as a frozen section (FSA), and sent for traditional H&E examination. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and the negative predictive value (NPV) of FCM and FSA were assessed and compared with H&E for urethral and ureteral margins separately. Results: The agreement was evaluated through Cohen’s κ statistic. Urethral diagnostic agreement between FCM and FSA showed a κ = 0.776 (p < 0.001), while between FCM and H&E, the agreement was κ = 0.691 (p < 0.001). With regard to ureteral margins, an overall agreement of κ = 0.712 (p < 0.001) between FCM and FSA and of κ = 0.481 (p < 0.001) between FCM and H&E was found. Conclusions: FCM proved to be a safe, feasible, and reproducible method for the intraoperative assessment of urethral and ureteral margins during ORC. Compared to standard FSA, FCM showed adequate diagnostic performance in detecting urethral and ureteral malignant involvement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Prata
- Department of Urology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Rome, Italy
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +39-3934373027; Fax: +39-06225411995
| | - Umberto Anceschi
- Department of Urology, IRCCS “Regina Elena” National Cancer Institute, 00144 Rome, Italy
| | - Chiara Taffon
- Pathology Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Rome, Italy
| | - Silvia Maria Rossi
- Pathology Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Rome, Italy
| | - Martina Verri
- Unit of Endocrine Organs and Neuromuscular Pathology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Rome, Italy
| | - Andrea Iannuzzi
- Department of Urology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Rome, Italy
| | - Alberto Ragusa
- Department of Urology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Rome, Italy
| | - Francesco Esperto
- Department of Urology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Rome, Italy
| | - Salvatore Mario Prata
- Simple Operating Unit of Lower Urinary Tract Surgery, SS. Trinità Hospital, 03039 Sora, Italy
| | - Anna Crescenzi
- Pathology Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Rome, Italy
| | - Roberto Mario Scarpa
- Department of Urology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Rome, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Simone
- Department of Urology, IRCCS “Regina Elena” National Cancer Institute, 00144 Rome, Italy
| | - Rocco Papalia
- Department of Urology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Laukhtina E, Moschini M, Soria F, Andrea DD, Teoh JYC, Mori K, Albisinni S, Mari A, Krajewski W, Cimadamore A, Abufaraj M, Enikeev D, Neuzillet Y, Giannarini G, Xylinas E, Kamat AM, Roupret M, Babjuk M, Witjes JA, Shariat SF, Pradere B. Follow-up of the Urethra and Management of Urethral Recurrence After Radical Cystectomy: A Systematic Review and Proposal of Management Algorithm by the European Association of Urology-Young Academic Urologists: Urothelial Carcinoma Working Group. Eur Urol Focus 2022; 8:1635-1642. [PMID: 35337773 DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2022.03.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/26/2021] [Revised: 02/20/2022] [Accepted: 03/07/2022] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
CONTEXT Surveillance of the urethra and management of urethral recurrence (UR) after radical cystectomy (RC) is an area with poor evidence. OBJECTIVE We aimed to summarize the available evidence and provide clinicians with practical recommendations on how to prevent and manage UR after RC for bladder cancer. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched during September 2021 for studies evaluating UR after RC. The primary endpoint was oncologic outcomes for patients who experienced UR depending on different surveillance and management approaches. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Forty-three studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. According to the currently available literature, a tight-knitted surveillance protocol should be implemented for males treated with RC and nonorthotopic neobladder diversion as well as patients with prostatic involvement, tumor multifocality, bladder neck involvement, and concomitant carcinoma in situ. A survival benefit of a prophylactic urethrectomy has been reported only in patients at very high risk for UR based on clinical factors. Surveillance protocols were highly heterogeneous and poorly documented among included studies. Patients whose UR was diagnosed based on clinical symptoms had a poor prognosis. Only limited data were available on the comparative effectiveness of watchful waiting after RC versus clinical symptom screening as part of a follow-up strategy. However, the use of regular cytology and/or urethroscopy seems useful in select patients at high risk for UR. Despite limited data on the optimal management of UR, urethra-sparing approaches (transurethral resection of UR) seem to be an option for Ta (only) recurrences; a salvage urethrectomy with or without chemotherapy should be the standard for all others. CONCLUSIONS Based on the currently available literature, we have proposed an algorithm to guide the decision-making process to help identify and treat UR after RC. Given the lack of evidence on how to deal with UR and surveil patients at risk for UR, this study may invigorate research in this area of unmet need. PATIENT SUMMARY Early diagnosis and tailored management of urethral recurrence could help improve oncologic outcomes in these patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ekaterina Laukhtina
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Marco Moschini
- Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, Urological Research Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Soria
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, University of Studies of Torino, Torino, Italy
| | - David D Andrea
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh
- S.H. Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
| | - Keiichiro Mori
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Simone Albisinni
- Service d'Urologie, Hôpital Erasme, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
| | - Andrea Mari
- Department of Urology, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Wojciech Krajewski
- Department of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, University Center of Excellence in Urology, Wrocław Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland
| | - Alessia Cimadamore
- Section of Pathological Anatomy, Marche Polytechnic University, School of Medicine, United Hospitals, Ancona, Italy
| | - Mohammad Abufaraj
- Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - Dmitry Enikeev
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Yann Neuzillet
- Department of Urology, Hôpital Foch, UVSQ-Paris-Saclay University, Suresnes, France
| | - Gianluca Giannarini
- Urology Unit, University Hospital Santa Maria della Misericordia, Udine, Italy
| | - Evanguelos Xylinas
- Department of Urology, Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris University, Paris, France
| | - Ashish M Kamat
- Department of Urology, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, University of Texas, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Morgan Roupret
- GRC n°5, Predictive Onco-Urology, Ap-Hp, Urology, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France
| | - Marko Babjuk
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Hospital Motol, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - J Alfred Witjes
- Department of Urology, Radboud University, Nijmegen Heyendaal, The Netherlands
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia; Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan; Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Benjamin Pradere
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
18 F-FDG PET/CT in Urethral Metastases From Bladder Cancer. Clin Nucl Med 2022; 47:e713-e714. [PMID: 35961619 DOI: 10.1097/rlu.0000000000004358] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
ABSTRACT Urethral metastasis of bladder cancer after surgery is rare. We present a 63-year-old man who had surgery for invasive bladder carcinoma and prostate adenocarcinoma 4 years ago and referred for urethral hemorrhage. 18 F-FDG PET/CT was performed for restaging and showed intense linear 18 F-FDG activity in the proximal urethra. The patient underwent urethrectomy, and histopathology determined urethral metastasis.
Collapse
|
9
|
Morizane S, Honda M, Yumioka T, Iwamoto H, Hikita K, Takenaka A. Technique of en bloc resection of the membranous urethra and bladder during robot-assisted radical cystectomy in patients without simultaneous urethrectomy. Asian J Endosc Surg 2022; 15:683-687. [PMID: 35114733 DOI: 10.1111/ases.13034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/26/2021] [Revised: 01/03/2022] [Accepted: 01/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Prophylactic urethrectomy is often performed simultaneously with radical cystectomy (RC) in patients who are not selected for neobladder creation for urinary diversion. However, the indications for prophylactic urethrectomy are still controversial. Here, we introduce the ideal urethral dissection technique during robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) in patients without simultaneous prophylactic urethrectomy. MATERIALS AND SURGICAL TECHNIQUE At our hospital, RARC is performed using a da Vinci surgical system with the operating table tilted to 20°. After lymph node dissection and bladder mobilization, periurethral dissection is commenced. A notable point of our technique is en bloc resection of the bladder and membranous urethra using a continuous intracorporeal approach. First, while applying traction on the isolated bladder in the cranial direction, we carefully and gradually dissect the urethral smooth muscle from the external urethral sphincter with electrocautery scissors. Next, we ligate the membranous urethra with suture material as far from the prostate as possible. Then, we cut the urethra as far from the prostate as possible after ligation of the urethra with a Hem-o-lok clip just beyond the apex of the prostate. Using this method, we are able to remove at least 1.0 cm of the membranous urethra en bloc with the bladder. Finally, we suture the pelvic floor, including the levator ani muscle, in two layers using 3-0 V-Loc and 2-0 V-Loc sutures. DISCUSSION We believe this technique allows separation of the residual urethra from the abdominal cavity and enables safe performance of secondary urethrectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shuichi Morizane
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan
| | - Masashi Honda
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan
| | - Tetsuya Yumioka
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan
| | - Hideto Iwamoto
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan
| | - Katsuya Hikita
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan
| | - Atsushi Takenaka
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Laukhtina E, Mori K, D Andrea D, Moschini M, Abufaraj M, Soria F, Mari A, Krajewski W, Albisinni S, Teoh JYC, Quhal F, Sari Motlagh R, Mostafaei H, Katayama S, Grossmann NС, Rajwa P, Enikeev D, Zimmermann K, Fajkovic H, Glybochko P, Shariat SF, Pradere B. Incidence, risk factors and outcomes of urethral recurrence after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Urol Oncol 2021; 39:806-815. [PMID: 34266740 DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2021.06.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2021] [Revised: 05/17/2021] [Accepted: 06/13/2021] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the incidence and risk factors of urethral recurrence (UR) as well as summarizing data on survival outcomes in patients with UR after radical cystectomy (RC) for bladder cancer. The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched in February 2021 for studies of patients with UR after RC. Incidence and risk factors of UR were the primary endpoints. The secondary endpoint was survival outcomes in patients who experienced UR. Twenty-one studies, comprising 9,435 patients, were included in the quantitative synthesis. Orthotopic neobladder (ONB) diversion was associated with a decreased probability of UR compared to non-ONB (pooled OR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.31-0.61, P < 0.001) and male patients had a significantly higher risk of UR compared to female patients (pooled OR: 3.16, 95% CI: 1.83-5.47, P < 0.001). Among risk factors, prostatic urethral or prostatic stromal involvement (pooled HR: 5.44, 95% CI: 3.58-8.26, P < 0.001; pooled HR: 5.90, 95% CI: 1.82-19.17, P = 0.003, respectively) and tumor multifocality (pooled HR: 2.97, 95% CI: 2.05-4.29, P < 0.001) were associated with worse urethral recurrence-free survival. Neither tumor stage (P = 0.63) nor CIS (P = 0.72) were associated with worse urethral recurrence-free survival. Patients with UR had a 5-year CSS that varied from 47% to 63% and an OS - from 40% to 74%; UR did not appear to be related to worse survival outcomes. Male patients treated with non-ONB diversion as well as patients with prostatic involvement and tumor multifocality seem to be at the highest risk of UR after RC. Risk-adjusted standardized surveillance protocols should be developed into clinical practice after RC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ekaterina Laukhtina
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Keiichiro Mori
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - David D Andrea
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Marco Moschini
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, Switzerland; Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, Urological Research Institute, Milano, Italy
| | - Mohammad Abufaraj
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - Francesco Soria
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, University of Studies of Torino, Turin, Italy
| | - Andrea Mari
- Department of Urology, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Wojciech Krajewski
- Department of Urology and Oncologic Urology, Wrocław Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland
| | - Simone Albisinni
- Service d'Urologie, Hôpital Erasme, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
| | - Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh
- S.H. Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
| | - Fahad Quhal
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, King Fahad Specialist Hospital, Dammam, Saudi Arabia
| | - Reza Sari Motlagh
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Men's Health and Reproductive Health Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Hadi Mostafaei
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Research Center for Evidence Based Medicine, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
| | - Satoshi Katayama
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
| | - Nico С Grossmann
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Pawel Rajwa
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Medical University of Silesia, Zabrze, Poland
| | - Dmitry Enikeev
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Kristin Zimmermann
- Department of Urology, Federal Armed Services Hospital Koblenz, Koblenz, Germany
| | - Harun Fajkovic
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Federal Armed Services Hospital Koblenz, Koblenz, Germany
| | - Petr Glybochko
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia; Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan; Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, NY; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
| | - Benjamin Pradere
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Pang KH, Esperto F, Sproson C, Yeung M, Morgan SL, Downey AP, Hillary CJ, Catto JWF, Rosario DJ, Noon AP. Urethral recurrence after radical cystoprostatectomy: Experience from a high-volume tertiary referral centre. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL UROLOGY 2021. [DOI: 10.1177/2051415820920519] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Objectives: To report our urethral surveillance programme and urethral cancer recurrence rate following radical cystoprostatectomy (RC). Patients and methods: A retrospective analysis of clinical and histopathological data of men who underwent RC and urethral surveillance, between January 2011 and October 2016. Results: RC was performed for 491 men; 31 and 19 men had a synchronous (malignancy, n = 10, 32.3%) and interval (malignancy, n = 6, 31.6%) urethrectomy, respectively. The remaining 441 men underwent surveillance; 183 (41.5%) men had at least one urethroscopy, 14 (3.2%) urethrectomies were performed and 12 (2.7%) specimens confirmed urethral recurrence (UR). Within the URs, 7/12 (58.3%) men presented symptomatically and 5/12 (41.7%) were detected through surveillance. At a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 21.8 (9.7–36.7) months, the 2-year disease-specific survival in men who had synchronous urethrectomy was 71.4% (versus no urethrectomy (84.6%) interval urethrectomy (92.9%) and urethrectomy for recurrence (83.8%)). Conclusion: UR following RC is low in men without risk factors for urethral disease. Annual urethroscopy and urine cytology may not be feasible and appropriate in all men after RC, and does not appear to impact survival at 2 years. A risk-adapted approach may allow the avoidance of annual urethroscopy in asymptomatic men post RC. Level of Evidence: 3b
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karl H Pang
- Academic Urology Unit, University of Sheffield, UK
| | - Francesco Esperto
- Department of Urology, Campus Biomedico, University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | | | - Maidie Yeung
- Department of Histopathology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | - Susan L Morgan
- Department of Histopathology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | - Alison P Downey
- Department of Urology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | | | - James WF Catto
- Academic Urology Unit, University of Sheffield, UK
- Department of Urology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | - Derek J Rosario
- Academic Urology Unit, University of Sheffield, UK
- Department of Urology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | - Aidan P Noon
- Department of Urology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Laukhtina E, Rajwa P, Mori K, Moschini M, D'Andrea D, Abufaraj M, Soria F, Mari A, Krajewski W, Albisinni S, Teoh JYC, Quhal F, Sari Motlagh R, Mostafaei H, Katayama S, Grossmann NC, Enikeev D, Zimmermann K, Fajkovic H, Glybochko P, Shariat SF, Pradere B. Accuracy of Frozen Section Analysis of Urethral and Ureteral Margins During Radical Cystectomy for Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Diagnostic Meta-Analysis. Eur Urol Focus 2021; 8:752-760. [PMID: 34127436 DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2021.05.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2021] [Revised: 05/07/2021] [Accepted: 05/25/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
CONTEXT The question of the ability of frozen section analysis (FSA) to accurately detect malignant pathology intraoperatively has been discussed for many decades. OBJECTIVE We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the diagnostic estimates of FSA of the urethral and ureteral margins in patients treated with radical cystectomy (RC) for bladder cancer (BCa). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched in February 2021 for studies analyzing the association between FSA and the final urethral and ureteral margin status in patients treated with RC for BCa. The primary endpoint was the value of pathologic detection of urethral and ureteral malignant involvement with FSA during RC compared with the final margin status. We included studies that provided true positive, true negative, false positive, and false negative values for FSA, which allowed us to calculate the diagnostic estimates. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Fourteen studies, comprising 8208 patients, were included in the quantitative synthesis. Forest plots revealed that the pooled sensitivity and specificity for FSA of urethral margins during RC were 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38-0.97) and 0.95 (95% CI 0.91-0.97), respectively. While for the FSA of ureteral margins, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.77 (95% CI 0.67-0.84) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.95-0.98), respectively. Calculated diagnostic odds ratios indicated high FSA effectiveness, and patients with a positive urethral or ureteral margin at final pathology are over 100 times more likely to have positive FSA than patients without margin involvement at final pathology. Area under the curves of 96.6% and 96.7% were reached for FSA detection of urethral and ureteral tumor involvement, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Intraoperative FSA demonstrated high diagnostic performance in detecting both urethral and ureteral malignant involvement at the time of RC for BCa. FSA of both urethral and ureteral margins during RC is accurate enough to be of great value in the routine management of BCa patients treated with RC. While its specificity was great to guide intraoperative decision-making, its sensitivity remains suboptimal yet. PATIENT SUMMARY We believe that the frozen section analysis of both urethral and ureteral margins during radical cystectomy should be considered more often in urologic practice, until quality of life-based cost-effectiveness studies can identify patients within each institution who are unlikely to benefit from it.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ekaterina Laukhtina
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Pawel Rajwa
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Medical University of Silesia, Zabrze, Poland
| | - Keiichiro Mori
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Marco Moschini
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, Switzerland; Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, Urological Research Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - David D'Andrea
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Mohammad Abufaraj
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - Francesco Soria
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, University of Studies of Torino, Turin, Italy
| | - Andrea Mari
- Department of Urology, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Wojciech Krajewski
- Department of Urology and Oncologic Urology, Wrocław Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland
| | - Simone Albisinni
- Service d'Urologie, Hôpital Erasme, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
| | - Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh
- S.H. Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
| | - Fahad Quhal
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, King Fahad Specialist Hospital, Dammam, Saudi Arabia
| | - Reza Sari Motlagh
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Men's Health and Reproductive Health Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Hadi Mostafaei
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Research Center for Evidence Based Medicine, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
| | - Satoshi Katayama
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
| | - Nico C Grossmann
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Dmitry Enikeev
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Kristin Zimmermann
- Department of Urology, Federal Armed Services Hospital Koblenz, Koblenz, Germany
| | - Harun Fajkovic
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria
| | - Petr Glybochko
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia; Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan; Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA; Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
| | - Benjamin Pradere
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Hakozaki K, Kikuchi E, Ogihara K, Shigeta K, Abe T, Miyazaki Y, Kaneko G, Maeda T, Yoshimine S, Kanai K, Ide H, Shirotake S, Oyama M, Mizuno R, Oya M. Significance of prophylactic urethrectomy at the time of radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2021; 51:287-295. [PMID: 32893303 DOI: 10.1093/jjco/hyaa168] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2020] [Accepted: 08/17/2020] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Prophylactic urethrectomy at the time of radical cystectomy is frequently recommended for patients with bladder cancer at a high risk of urethral recurrence without definitive evidence. The present study attempted to clarify the survival benefits of performing prophylactic urethrectomy. METHODS We identified 214 male patients who were treated by radical cystectomy with an incontinent urinary diversion in our seven institutions between 2004 and 2017. We used propensity score matching and ultimately identified 114 patients, 57 of whom underwent prophylactic urethrectomy (prophylactic urethrectomy group) and 57 who did not (non-prophylactic urethrectomy group). RESULTS No significant differences were observed in the 5-year overall survival rate between the prophylactic urethrectomy and non-prophylactic urethrectomy groups in the overall. However, the local recurrence rate was significantly lower in the prophylactic urethrectomy group than in the non-prophylactic urethrectomy group (P = 0.015). In the subgroup of 58 patients with multiple tumours and/or concomitant carcinoma in situ at the time of transurethral resection of bladder tumour, the 5-year overall survival rate was significantly higher in the prophylactic urethrectomy group than in the non-prophylactic urethrectomy group (P = 0.021). A multivariate analysis revealed that performing prophylactic urethrectomy was the only independent predictor of the overall survival rate (P = 0.016). In those patients who were treated without neoadjuvant chemotherapy (n = 38), the 5-year overall survival rate was significantly higher in the prophylactic urethrectomy group than in the non-prophylactic urethrectomy group (P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS Prophylactic urethrectomy at the time of radical cystectomy may have a survival benefit in patients with multiple tumours and/or concomitant carcinoma in situ, particularly those who do not receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kyohei Hakozaki
- Department of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.,Department of Urology, National Hospital Organization Saitama National Hospital, Saitama
| | - Eiji Kikuchi
- Department of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.,Department of Urology, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, Kanagawa
| | - Koichiro Ogihara
- Department of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.,Department of Urology, Kawasaki Municipal Hospital, Kanagawa
| | - Keisuke Shigeta
- Department of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Takayuki Abe
- Department of Clinical and Translational Research Center, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo.,Yokohama City University, School of Data Science, Kanagawa
| | - Yasumasa Miyazaki
- Department of Urology, Saiseikai Yokohamashi Tobu Hospital, Kanagawa
| | - Gou Kaneko
- Department of Uro-Oncology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Saitama
| | - Takahiro Maeda
- Department of Urology, Kawasaki Municipal Hospital, Kanagawa
| | | | - Kunimitsu Kanai
- Department of Urology, National Hospital Organization Saitama National Hospital, Saitama
| | - Hiroki Ide
- Department of Urology, Saiseikai Central Hospital, Tokyo
| | - Suguru Shirotake
- Department of Uro-Oncology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Saitama
| | - Masafumi Oyama
- Department of Uro-Oncology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Saitama
| | - Ryuichi Mizuno
- Department of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Mototsugu Oya
- Department of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Incontinent Urinary Diversion. Bladder Cancer 2021. [DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-70646-3_17] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
|
15
|
Liu Z, Zhang X, Wu B, Zhao Y, Bai S. Development and Validation of a Model for Predicting Urethral Recurrence in Male Patients with Muscular Invasive Bladder Cancer After Radical Cystectomy Combined with Urinary Diversion. Cancer Manag Res 2020; 12:7649-7657. [PMID: 32922074 PMCID: PMC7457729 DOI: 10.2147/cmar.s261809] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/12/2020] [Accepted: 08/02/2020] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Radical cystectomy (RC) is the primary treatment strategy for patients with muscular invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). However, the prognosis is poor and tumor recurrence is not rare, in particular, urethral recurrence (UR) in male patients who underwent RC combined with urinary diversion. Here, we have developed and validated a model for predicting UR in these patients. Patients and Methods The development cohort comprised 310 patients who underwent RC combined with urinary diversion at our center between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2015. Clinicopathologic data of patients were comprehensively recorded. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression was used for building a predictive model with regression coefficients and backward stepwise selection applied by utilizing the likelihood ratio test with Akaike’s information criterion as the stopping rule. An independent cohort consisting of 131 consecutive patients treated from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2017 was used for validation. The performance of this predictive model was assessed with respect to discrimination, calibration, and clinical usefulness. Results The predictors of this model included body mass index, history of transurethral resection of bladder tumor, tumor grade, tumor stage, and concomitant carcinoma in situ. In the validation cohort, the model showed good discrimination with a concordance index of 0.777 (95% CI, 0.618 to 0.937) and calibration. Decision curve analysis also demonstrated the clinical utility of the model. Conclusion The predictive model facilitated postoperative individualized prediction of UR in male patients with MIBC after RC combined with urinary diversion and it may therefore serve to improve follow-up strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zeqi Liu
- Department of Urology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning 110004, People's Republic of China
| | - Xuanyu Zhang
- Department of Urology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning 110004, People's Republic of China
| | - Bin Wu
- Department of Urology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning 110004, People's Republic of China
| | - Yueyang Zhao
- Department of Library and Statistics, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang 110004, People's Republic of China
| | - Song Bai
- Department of Urology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning 110004, People's Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Lee DH, Song W. Risk Factors for Urethral Recurrence in Men After Radical Cystectomy with Orthotopic Urinary Diversion for Urothelial Carcinoma: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Cancer Manag Res 2020; 12:6739-6746. [PMID: 32848456 PMCID: PMC7425095 DOI: 10.2147/cmar.s260979] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2020] [Accepted: 07/16/2020] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To evaluate the risk factors affecting urethral recurrence (UR) in men after radical cystectomy (RC) with ileal orthotopic neobladder (IONB). Materials and Methods We retrospectively reviewed 348 men who underwent RC with IONB for bladder cancer between January 2010 and December 2017. Clinicopathologic characteristics, including tumor location (trigone and/or bladder neck), prostatic urethral and/or stromal involvement, presence of carcinoma in situ (CIS), pathologic T and N stage, and urethral resection margin status, were identified. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was used to illustrate urethral recurrence-free survival (URFS), and Cox proportional hazard models were applied to identify factors predicting UR. Results Of the 348 patients, UR was identified in 7 (2.0%) patients during the mean follow-up of 33.3 months. The 2-, 3-, and 5-year URFS rates were 97.6%, 96.3%, and 93.8%, respectively. On multivariable analysis, prostatic urethral involvement (P = 0.033, hazard ratio: 6.25, 95% confidence interval: 1.06–36.96) was an independent predictor of UR. When patients were divided according to prostatic urethral involvement (negative vs positive), the 2- and 3-year URFS rates were significantly different (93.8% and 96.8%, respectively, vs 92.0% and 92.0%, respectively; P = 0.020). All 7 patients with UR underwent transurethral surgery and maintained their IONB. Conclusion In this series, UR occurred in approximately 2% of men after RC with IONB. Prostatic urethral involvement was the only significant prognostic factor for UR. Follow-up strategies considering UR risk should be adopted to facilitate early detection in those at high risk of UR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dong Hyeon Lee
- Department of Urology, Ewha Womans University Medical Center, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Wan Song
- Department of Urology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Witjes JA, Babjuk M, Bellmunt J, Bruins HM, De Reijke TM, De Santis M, Gillessen S, James N, Maclennan S, Palou J, Powles T, Ribal MJ, Shariat SF, Der Kwast TV, Xylinas E, Agarwal N, Arends T, Bamias A, Birtle A, Black PC, Bochner BH, Bolla M, Boormans JL, Bossi A, Briganti A, Brummelhuis I, Burger M, Castellano D, Cathomas R, Chiti A, Choudhury A, Compérat E, Crabb S, Culine S, De Bari B, De Blok W, J L De Visschere P, Decaestecker K, Dimitropoulos K, Dominguez-Escrig JL, Fanti S, Fonteyne V, Frydenberg M, Futterer JJ, Gakis G, Geavlete B, Gontero P, Grubmüller B, Hafeez S, Hansel DE, Hartmann A, Hayne D, Henry AM, Hernandez V, Herr H, Herrmann K, Hoskin P, Huguet J, Jereczek-Fossa BA, Jones R, Kamat AM, Khoo V, Kiltie AE, Krege S, Ladoire S, Lara PC, Leliveld A, Linares-Espinós E, Løgager V, Lorch A, Loriot Y, Meijer R, Mir MC, Moschini M, Mostafid H, Müller AC, Müller CR, N'Dow J, Necchi A, Neuzillet Y, Oddens JR, Oldenburg J, Osanto S, J G Oyen W, Pacheco-Figueiredo L, Pappot H, Patel MI, Pieters BR, Plass K, Remzi M, Retz M, Richenberg J, Rink M, Roghmann F, Rosenberg JE, Rouprêt M, Rouvière O, Salembier C, Salminen A, Sargos P, Sengupta S, Sherif A, Smeenk RJ, Smits A, Stenzl A, Thalmann GN, Tombal B, Turkbey B, Lauridsen SV, Valdagni R, Van Der Heijden AG, Van Poppel H, Vartolomei MD, Veskimäe E, Vilaseca A, Rivera FAV, Wiegel T, Wiklund P, Williams A, Zigeuner R, Horwich A. EAU-ESMO Consensus Statements on the Management of Advanced and Variant Bladder Cancer-An International Collaborative Multistakeholder Effort †: Under the Auspices of the EAU-ESMO Guidelines Committees. Eur Urol 2020; 77:223-250. [PMID: 31753752 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.09.035] [Citation(s) in RCA: 106] [Impact Index Per Article: 26.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2019] [Accepted: 09/26/2019] [Indexed: 12/09/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial. OBJECTIVE To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management. DESIGN A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts prior to voting during a consensus conference. SETTING Online Delphi survey and consensus conference. PARTICIPANTS The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1-3 (disagree), 4-6 (equivocal), and 7-9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these statements, 33 (28%) achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease, and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease. CONCLUSIONS These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time when further evidence is available to guide our approach. PATIENT SUMMARY This report summarises findings from an international, multistakeholder project organised by the EAU and ESMO. In this project, a steering committee identified areas of bladder cancer management where there is currently no good-quality evidence to guide treatment decisions. From this, they developed a series of proposed statements, 71 of which achieved consensus by a large group of experts in the field of bladder cancer. It is anticipated that these statements will provide further guidance to health care professionals and could help improve patient outcomes until a time when good-quality evidence is available.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Alfred Witjes
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | - Marek Babjuk
- Depatment of Urology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Hospital Motol, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Joaquim Bellmunt
- IMIM-Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute, Barcelona, Spain; Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - H Maxim Bruins
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Theo M De Reijke
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Maria De Santis
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Charité University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - Silke Gillessen
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Division of Oncology and Haematology, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland; University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Nicholas James
- University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK; Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | | | - Juan Palou
- Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Tom Powles
- The Royal Free NHS Trust, London, UK; Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Maria J Ribal
- Uro-Oncology Unit, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Spain
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Depatment of Urology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Hospital Motol, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Theo Van Der Kwast
- Department of Pathology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Evanguelos Xylinas
- Department of Urology, Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France; Paris Descartes University, Paris, France
| | - Neeraj Agarwal
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah (NCI-CCC), Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Tom Arends
- Urology Department, Canisius-Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Aristotle Bamias
- 2nd Propaedeutic Dept of Internal Medicine, Medical School, National & Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - Alison Birtle
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; Rosemere Cancer Centre, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals, Preston, UK
| | - Peter C Black
- Department of Urologic Sciences, Vancouver Prostate Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Colombia, Canada
| | - Bernard H Bochner
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA; Urology Service, Department of Urology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Michel Bolla
- Emeritus Professor of Radiation Oncology, Grenoble - Alpes University, Grenoble, France
| | - Joost L Boormans
- Department of Urology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Alberto Bossi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gustave Roussy Institute, Villejuif, France
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Department of Urology, Urological Research Institute, Milan; Vita-Salute University, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Iris Brummelhuis
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Max Burger
- Department of Urology, Caritas-St. Josef Medical Center, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
| | - Daniel Castellano
- Medical Oncology Department, 12 de Octubre University Hospital (CIBERONC), Madrid, Spain
| | - Richard Cathomas
- Departement Innere Medizin, Abteilung Onkologie und Hämatologie, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland
| | - Arturo Chiti
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy; Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Ananya Choudhury
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Eva Compérat
- Department of Pathology, Tenon hospital, HUEP, Paris, France; Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | - Simon Crabb
- Cancer Sciences Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Stephane Culine
- Department of Cancer Medicine, Hôpital Saint Louis, Paris, France
| | - Berardino De Bari
- Radiation Oncology Department, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire "Jean Minjoz" of Besançon, INSERM UMR 1098, Besançon, France; Radiation Oncology Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Université de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Willem De Blok
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Pieter J L De Visschere
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Division of Genitourinary Radiology and Mammography, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | | | | | | | - Stefano Fanti
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Policlinico S Orsola, University of Bologna, Italy
| | - Valerie Fonteyne
- Department of Radiotherapy Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Mark Frydenberg
- Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Australia
| | - Jurgen J Futterer
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Georgios Gakis
- Department of Urology and Paediatric Urology, University Hospital of Würzburg, Julius-Maximillians University, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Bogdan Geavlete
- Department of Urology, Saint John Emergency Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Paolo Gontero
- Division of Urology, Molinette Hospital, University of Studies of Torino, Torino, Italy
| | | | - Shaista Hafeez
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; Department of Clinical Oncology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Donna E Hansel
- Department of Urology, University of California, San Diego Pathology, La Jolla, California, USA
| | - Arndt Hartmann
- Institute of Pathology, Friedrich-Alexander University (FAU) Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Dickon Hayne
- Department of Urology, UWA Medical School, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
| | - Ann M Henry
- Leeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Virginia Hernandez
- Department of Urology, Hospital Universitario Fundación de Alcorcón, Madrid, Spain
| | - Harry Herr
- Urology Service, Department of Urology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Ken Herrmann
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Peter Hoskin
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Mount Vernon Centre for Cancer Treatment, London, UK
| | - Jorge Huguet
- Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Barbara A Jereczek-Fossa
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan; Division of Radiotherapy, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Rob Jones
- Institute of Cancer Sciences, College of Medicine, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - Ashish M Kamat
- Department of Urology - Division of Surgery, The University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Vincent Khoo
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; Department of Clinical Oncology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne; Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Anne E Kiltie
- CRUK/MRC Oxford Institute for Radiation Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Susanne Krege
- Department of Urology, Pediatric Urology and Urologic Oncology, Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Essen, Germany
| | - Sylvain Ladoire
- Department of Medical Oncology, Centre Georges François Leclerc, Dijon, France
| | - Pedro C Lara
- Department of Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Roque; Universidad Fernando Pessoa, Canarias, Spain
| | - Annemarie Leliveld
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Vibeke Løgager
- Department of Radiology, Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev and Gentofte, Herlev, Denmark
| | - Anja Lorch
- Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology, University Hospital Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Yohann Loriot
- Département de Médecine Oncologique, Gustave Roussy, INSERM U981, Université Paris-Sud, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - Richard Meijer
- UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, MS Oncologic Urology, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M Carmen Mir
- Servicio de Urología, Fundación Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, Valencia, Spain
| | - Marco Moschini
- Department of Urology, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Luzern, Switzerland
| | - Hugh Mostafid
- Department of Urology, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK
| | | | | | - James N'Dow
- Academic Urology Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK; Department of Urology, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Andrea Necchi
- Department of Medical Oncology, Istituto Nazionale Tumori of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Yann Neuzillet
- Department of Urology, Hospital Foch, University of Versailles-Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines, Suresnes, France
| | - Jorg R Oddens
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jan Oldenburg
- Department of Oncology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway; Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Susanne Osanto
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Wim J G Oyen
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy; Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands
| | - Luís Pacheco-Figueiredo
- Department of Urology, Centro Hospitalar São João, Porto, Portugal; Life and Health Sciences Research Institute (ICVS), School of Medicine, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal
| | - Helle Pappot
- Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, University Hospital of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Manish I Patel
- Department of Urology, Westmead Hospital, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Bradley R Pieters
- Department Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Karin Plass
- EAU Guidelines Office, Arnhem, The Netherlands
| | - Mesut Remzi
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Margitta Retz
- Department of Urology, Rechts der Isar Medical Center, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Jonathan Richenberg
- Department of Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton, UK; Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, UK
| | - Michael Rink
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Florian Roghmann
- Department of Urology, Ruhr-University Bochum, Marien Hospital, Herne, Germany
| | - Jonathan E Rosenberg
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA; Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
| | - Morgan Rouprêt
- Department of Urology, Sorbonne Université, GRC n°5, ONCOTYPE-URO, AP-HP, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, Paris, France
| | - Olivier Rouvière
- Hospices Civils de Lyon, Service d'Imagerie Urinaire et Vasculaire, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France; Université de Lyon, Université Lyon 1, faculté de médecine Lyon Est, Lyon, France
| | - Carl Salembier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Europe Hospitals Brussels, Belgium
| | - Antti Salminen
- Department of Urology, University Hospital of Turku, Finland
| | - Paul Sargos
- Department of Radiotherapy, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France
| | - Shomik Sengupta
- Department of Surgery, Austin Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia; Eastern Health Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Amir Sherif
- Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Urology and Andrology, Umeå university, Umeå, Sweden
| | - Robert J Smeenk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Anita Smits
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Arnulf Stenzl
- Department of Urology, Eberhard Karls University Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - George N Thalmann
- Department of Urology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Bertrand Tombal
- Division of Urology, IREC, Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, UCL, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Susanne Vahr Lauridsen
- Department of Urology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Riccardo Valdagni
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, Università degli Studi di Milano, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | | | | | - Mihai D Vartolomei
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science, and Technology of Targu Mures, Romania
| | - Erik Veskimäe
- Department of Urology, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland
| | - Antoni Vilaseca
- Uro-Oncology Unit, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Spain
| | - Franklin A Vives Rivera
- Clinica HematoOncologica Bonadona Prevenir, Universidad Metropolitana, Clinica Club de Leones, Barranquilla, Colombia
| | - Thomas Wiegel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Peter Wiklund
- Icahn School of Medicine, Mount Sinai Health System New York City, New York, USA; Department of Urology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Andrew Williams
- Department of Urology, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Richard Zigeuner
- Department of Urology, Medizinische Universität Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Alan Horwich
- Emeritus Professor, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Horwich A, Babjuk M, Bellmunt J, Bruins HM, De Reijke TM, De Santis M, Gillessen S, James N, Maclennan S, Palou J, Powles T, Ribal MJ, Shariat SF, Van Der Kwast T, Xylinas E, Agarwal N, Arends T, Bamias A, Birtle A, Black PC, Bochner BH, Bolla M, Boormans JL, Bossi A, Briganti A, Brummelhuis I, Burger M, Castellano D, Cathomas R, Chiti A, Choudhury A, Compérat E, Crabb S, Culine S, De Bari B, DeBlok W, De Visschere PJL, Decaestecker K, Dimitropoulos K, Dominguez-Escrig JL, Fanti S, Fonteyne V, Frydenberg M, Futterer JJ, Gakis G, Geavlete B, Gontero P, Grubmüller B, Hafeez S, Hansel DE, Hartmann A, Hayne D, Henry AM, Hernandez V, Herr H, Herrmann K, Hoskin P, Huguet J, Jereczek-Fossa BA, Jones R, Kamat AM, Khoo V, Kiltie AE, Krege S, Ladoire S, Lara PC, Leliveld A, Linares-Espinós E, Løgager V, Lorch A, Loriot Y, Meijer R, Carmen Mir M, Moschini M, Mostafid H, Müller AC, Müller CR, N'Dow J, Necchi A, Neuzillet Y, Oddens JR, Oldenburg J, Osanto S, Oyen WJG, Pacheco-Figueiredo L, Pappot H, Patel MI, Pieters BR, Plass K, Remzi M, Retz M, Richenberg J, Rink M, Roghmann F, Rosenberg JE, Rouprêt M, Rouvière O, Salembier C, Salminen A, Sargos P, Sengupta S, Sherif A, Smeenk RJ, Smits A, Stenzl A, Thalmann GN, Tombal B, Turkbey B, Vahr Lauridsen S, Valdagni R, Van Der Heijden AG, Van Poppel H, Vartolomei MD, Veskimäe E, Vilaseca A, Vives Rivera FA, Wiegel T, Wiklund P, Williams A, Zigeuner R, Witjes JA. EAU-ESMO consensus statements on the management of advanced and variant bladder cancer-an international collaborative multi-stakeholder effort: under the auspices of the EAU and ESMO Guidelines Committees†. Ann Oncol 2019; 30:1697-1727. [PMID: 31740927 PMCID: PMC7360152 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdz296] [Citation(s) in RCA: 57] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial. OBJECTIVE To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management. DESIGN A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts before voting during a consensus conference. SETTING Online Delphi survey and consensus conference. PARTICIPANTS The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1-3 (disagree), 4-6 (equivocal), 7-9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these, 33 (28%) statements achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) statements achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease. CONCLUSIONS These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time where further evidence is available to guide our approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Horwich
- Emeritus Professor, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; Emeritus Professor, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
| | - M Babjuk
- Depatment of Urology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Hospital Motol, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - J Bellmunt
- IMIM-Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute, Barcelona, Spain; Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - H M Bruins
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen
| | - T M De Reijke
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M De Santis
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Charité University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - S Gillessen
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester; The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Division of Oncology and Haematology, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen; University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - N James
- University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham; Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham
| | - S Maclennan
- Academic Urology Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - J Palou
- Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - T Powles
- The Royal Free NHS Trust, London; Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - M J Ribal
- Uro-Oncology Unit, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - S F Shariat
- Depatment of Urology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Hospital Motol, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
| | - T Van Der Kwast
- Department of Pathology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - E Xylinas
- Department of Urology, Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris; Paris Descartes University, Paris, France
| | - N Agarwal
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah (NCI-CCC), Salt Lake City, USA
| | - T Arends
- Urology Department, Canisius-Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - A Bamias
- 2nd Propaedeutic Dept of Internal Medicine, Medical School, National & Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - A Birtle
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester; Rosemere Cancer Centre, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals, Preston, UK
| | - P C Black
- Department of Urologic Sciences, Vancouver Prostate Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - B H Bochner
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York; Urology Service, Department of Urology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - M Bolla
- Emeritus Professor of Radiation Oncology, Grenoble - Alpes University, Grenoble, France
| | - J L Boormans
- Department of Urology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - A Bossi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Gustave Roussy Institute, Villejuif, France
| | - A Briganti
- Department of Urology, Urological Research Institute, Milan; Vita-Salute University, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - I Brummelhuis
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen
| | - M Burger
- Department of Urology, Caritas-St. Josef Medical Center, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
| | - D Castellano
- Medical Oncology Department, 12 de Octubre University Hospital (CIBERONC), Madrid, Spain
| | - R Cathomas
- Department Innere Medizin, Abteilung Onkologie und Hämatologie, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland
| | - A Chiti
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan; Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - A Choudhury
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester; The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - E Compérat
- Department of Pathology, Tenon Hospital, HUEP, Paris; Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | - S Crabb
- Cancer Sciences Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - S Culine
- Department of Cancer Medicine, Hôpital Saint Louis, Paris
| | - B De Bari
- Radiation Oncology Department, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire "Jean Minjoz" of Besançon, INSERM UMR 1098, Besançon, France; Radiation Oncology Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Université de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - W DeBlok
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - P J L De Visschere
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Division of Genitourinary Radiology and Mammography, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent
| | - K Decaestecker
- Department of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - K Dimitropoulos
- Department of Urology, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK
| | - J L Dominguez-Escrig
- Servicio de Urología, Fundación Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, Valencia, Spain
| | - S Fanti
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Policlinico S Orsola, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - V Fonteyne
- Department of Radiotherapy Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - M Frydenberg
- Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Australia
| | - J J Futterer
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - G Gakis
- Department of Urology and Paediatric Urology, University Hospital of Würzburg, Julius-Maximillians University, Würzburg, Germany
| | - B Geavlete
- Department of Urology, Saint John Emergency Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania
| | - P Gontero
- Division of Urology, Molinette Hospital, University of Studies of Torino, Torino, Italy
| | - B Grubmüller
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - S Hafeez
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London; Department of Clinical Oncology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - D E Hansel
- Department of Urology, University of California, San Diego Pathology, La Jolla, USA
| | - A Hartmann
- Institute of Pathology, Friedrich-Alexander University (FAU) Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - D Hayne
- Department of Urology, UWA Medical School, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
| | - A M Henry
- Leeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - V Hernandez
- Department of Urology, Hospital Universitario Fundación de Alcorcón, Madrid, Spain
| | - H Herr
- Urology Service, Department of Urology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - K Herrmann
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - P Hoskin
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester; The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Mount Vernon Centre for Cancer Treatment, London, UK
| | - J Huguet
- Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - B A Jereczek-Fossa
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan; Division of Radiotherapy, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - R Jones
- Institute of Cancer Sciences, College of Medicine, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - A M Kamat
- Department of Urology - Division of Surgery, The University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - V Khoo
- Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, London; Department of Clinical Oncology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Melbourne; Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - A E Kiltie
- CRUK/MRC Oxford Institute for Radiation Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - S Krege
- Department of Urology, Pediatric Urology and Urologic Oncology, Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Essen, Germany
| | - S Ladoire
- Department of Medical Oncology, Centre Georges François Leclerc, Dijon, France
| | - P C Lara
- Department of Oncology, Hospital Universitario San Roque, Canarias; Universidad Fernando Pessoa, Canarias, Spain
| | - A Leliveld
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | | | - V Løgager
- Department of Radiology, Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev and Gentofte, Herlev, Denmark
| | - A Lorch
- Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology, University Hospital Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Y Loriot
- Département de Médecine Oncologique, Gustave Roussy, INSERM U981, Université Paris-Sud, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - R Meijer
- UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, MS Oncologic Urology, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M Carmen Mir
- Servicio de Urología, Fundación Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, Valencia, Spain
| | - M Moschini
- Department of Urology, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Luzern, Switzerland
| | - H Mostafid
- Department of Urology, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK
| | - A-C Müller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Eberhard Karls University, Tübingen, Germany
| | - C R Müller
- Cancer Treatment Centre, Sorlandet Hospital, Kristiansand, Norway
| | - J N'Dow
- Academic Urology Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK; Department of Urology, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK
| | - A Necchi
- Department of Medical Oncology, Istituto Nazionale Tumori of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Y Neuzillet
- Department of Urology, Hospital Foch, University of Versailles-Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines, Suresnes, France
| | - J R Oddens
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J Oldenburg
- Department of Oncology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog; Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - S Osanto
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden
| | - W J G Oyen
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan; Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands
| | - L Pacheco-Figueiredo
- Department of Urology, Centro Hospitalar São João, Porto; Life and Health Sciences Research Institute (ICVS), School of Medicine, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal
| | - H Pappot
- Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, University Hospital of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - M I Patel
- Department of Urology, Westmead Hospital, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - B R Pieters
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam
| | - K Plass
- EAU Guidelines Office, Arnhem, The Netherlands
| | - M Remzi
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - M Retz
- Department of Urology, Rechts der Isar Medical Center, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - J Richenberg
- Department of Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton; Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, UK
| | - M Rink
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg
| | - F Roghmann
- Department of Urology, Ruhr-University Bochum, Marien Hospital, Herne, Germany
| | - J E Rosenberg
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York; Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, USA
| | - M Rouprêt
- Department of Urology, Sorbonne Université, GRC n°5, ONCOTYPE-URO, AP-HP, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, Paris
| | - O Rouvière
- Hospices Civils de Lyon, Service d'Imagerie Urinaire et Vasculaire, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Lyon; Université de Lyon, Université Lyon 1, Faculté de Médecine Lyon Est, Lyon, France
| | - C Salembier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Europe Hospitals Brussels, Brussels, Belgium
| | - A Salminen
- Department of Urology, University Hospital of Turku, Turku, Finland
| | - P Sargos
- Department of Radiotherapy, Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France
| | - S Sengupta
- Department of Surgery, Austin Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne; Eastern Health Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - A Sherif
- Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Urology and Andrology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
| | - R J Smeenk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - A Smits
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen
| | - A Stenzl
- Department of Urology, Eberhard Karls University Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - G N Thalmann
- Department of Urology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Berne, Switzerland
| | - B Tombal
- Division of Urology, IREC, Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, UCL, Brussels, Belgium
| | - B Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, USA
| | - S Vahr Lauridsen
- Department of Urology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - R Valdagni
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, Università degli Studi di Milano, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | | | - H Van Poppel
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - M D Vartolomei
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science, and Technology of Targu Mures, Targu Mures, Romania
| | - E Veskimäe
- Department of Urology, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland
| | - A Vilaseca
- Uro-Oncology Unit, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - F A Vives Rivera
- Clinica HematoOncologica Bonadona Prevenir, Universidad Metropolitana, Clinica Club de Leones, Barranquilla, Colombia
| | - T Wiegel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - P Wiklund
- Icahn School of Medicine, Mount Sinai Health System, New York City, USA; Department of Urology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - A Williams
- Department of Urology, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - R Zigeuner
- Department of Urology, Medizinische Universität Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - J A Witjes
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Shanks JH, Srigley JR, Brimo F, Comperat E, Delahunt B, Koch M, Lopez‐Beltran A, Reuter VE, Samaratunga H, Tsuzuki T, Kwast T, Varma M, Grignon D. Dataset for reporting of carcinoma of the urethra (in urethrectomy specimens): recommendations from the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR). Histopathology 2019; 75:453-467. [DOI: 10.1111/his.13877] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan H Shanks
- Department of Histopathology The Christie NHS Foundation Trust Manchester UK
| | - John R Srigley
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology University of Toronto Toronto ON Canada
| | - Fadi Brimo
- McGill University Health Center Montréal QC Canada
| | - Eva Comperat
- Department of Pathology Hospital Tenon, HUEP, Sorbonne University Paris France
| | - Brett Delahunt
- Department of Pathology and Molecular Medicine, Wellington School of Medicine and Health Sciences University of Otago Wellington New Zealand
| | - Michael Koch
- Department of Urology Indiana University School of Medicine Indianapolis IN USA
| | | | - Victor E Reuter
- Department of Pathology Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center New York NY USA
| | - Hemamali Samaratunga
- Aquesta Specialized Uropathology Brisbane Qld, Australia
- Centre for Clinical Research The University of Queensland Brisbane Qld, Australia
- Princess Alexandra Hospital Brisbane Qld Australia
| | | | - Theo Kwast
- Laboratory Medicine Program University Health Network, University of Toronto Toronto ON Canada
| | - Murali Varma
- Department of Cellular Pathology University Hospital of Wales Cardiff UK
| | - David Grignon
- IUH Pathology Laboratory, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Indiana University School of Medicine Indianapolis IN USA
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
|
21
|
Fahmy O, Khairul-Asri MG, Schubert T, Renninger M, Kübler H, Stenzl A, Gakis G. Urethral recurrence after radical cystectomy for urothelial carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Urol Oncol 2018; 36:54-59. [DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2017.11.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2017] [Revised: 11/05/2017] [Accepted: 11/12/2017] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
|
22
|
Park JJ, Park BK. The utility of CT and MRI in detecting male urethral recurrence after radical cystectomy. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2017; 42:2521-2526. [PMID: 28434064 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-017-1159-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the utility of computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in detecting male urethral recurrence (UR). MATERIALS AND METHODS Between December 2008 and March 2016, 12 men (age range 61-85 years; median, 74 years) with urethral bloody discharge or pain were histologically confirmed as UR after radical cystectomy due to urothelial carcinoma. Of these patients, eight underwent both CT and MRI. The remaining four patients underwent CT only. CT and MRI were compared regarding UR detection rate. CT and MRI were also evaluated to determine which modality was more accurate for depicting UR. UR detection rate of each MRI sequence were recorded. Standard reference was biopsy or urethrectomy in 11 patients and size change in one patient after treatment. RESULTS UR detection rate with CT was 41.7% (5/12), while that with MRI was 100% (8/8) (p = 0.0147). Of the eight patients who were diagnosed UR with MRI, six were detected with MRI alone and two with both MRI and CT (p = 0.0313). UR detection rates of T2-weighted, T1-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and contrast-enhanced MRI were 87.5% (7/8), 62.5% (5/8), 100% (5/5), and 87.5% (7/8), respectively. CONCLUSION MRI is superior to CT in detecting male URs in symptomatic patients after radical cystectomy. T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and contrast-enhanced MRI sequences are useful for detecting male UR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jung Jae Park
- Department of Radiology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 50 Ilwon-dong, Kangnam-ku, Seoul, 135-710, Korea
| | - Byung Kwan Park
- Department of Radiology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 50 Ilwon-dong, Kangnam-ku, Seoul, 135-710, Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Pichler R, Tulchiner G, Oberaigner W, Schaefer G, Horninger W, Brunner A, Heidegger I. Effect of Urinary Cytology for Detecting Recurrence in Remnant Urothelium After Radical Cystectomy: Insights From a 10-year Cytology Database. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2017; 15:e783-e791. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2017.03.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2017] [Revised: 02/20/2017] [Accepted: 03/06/2017] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
|
24
|
Characterization of Late Recurrence After Radical Cystectomy in a Large Multicenter Cohort of Bladder Cancer Patients. Urology 2017; 106:119-124. [DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2017.04.049] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2017] [Revised: 04/01/2017] [Accepted: 04/06/2017] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
|
25
|
Alimi Q, Verhoest G, Kammerer-Jacquet SF, Mathieu R, Bensalah K, Peyronnet B. Response to Re: Role of routine computed tomography scan in the oncological follow up of patients treated by radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. Int J Urol 2017; 24:242-243. [PMID: 28087901 DOI: 10.1111/iju.13290] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Quentin Alimi
- Department of Urology, University Hospital of Rennes, Rennes, France
| | - Grégory Verhoest
- Department of Urology, University Hospital of Rennes, Rennes, France
| | | | - Romain Mathieu
- Department of Urology, University Hospital of Rennes, Rennes, France
| | - Karim Bensalah
- Department of Urology, University Hospital of Rennes, Rennes, France
| | - Benoit Peyronnet
- Department of Urology, University Hospital of Rennes, Rennes, France
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Zargar-Shoshtari K, Sexton WJ, Poch MA. Management of Urethral Recurrences: Urothelial and Nonurothelial. Urol Clin North Am 2016; 43:515-521. [PMID: 27717437 DOI: 10.1016/j.ucl.2016.06.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
This article discusses the diagnostic and therapeutic options in the management of urethral cancer recurrence in patients treated with urethral sparing cystectomy as well as those who had urethral preservation following primary urethral carcinoma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Wade J Sexton
- Department of Genitourinary Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, 12902 Magnolia Drive, Tampa, FL 33612, USA
| | - Michael A Poch
- Department of Genitourinary Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, 12902 Magnolia Drive, Tampa, FL 33612, USA.
| |
Collapse
|