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

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00064203%3A_____%2F22%3A10442374" target="_blank" >RIV/00064203:_____/22:10442374 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/00216208:11130/22:10442374

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=N8bx-Rlfjf" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=N8bx-Rlfjf</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2022.03.004" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.euf.2022.03.004</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

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

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

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.

Název v anglickém jazyce

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

Popis výsledku anglicky

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.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

30217 - Urology and nephrology

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2022

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

European Urology Focus

ISSN

2405-4569

e-ISSN

2405-4569

Svazek periodika

8

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

6

Stát vydavatele periodika

NL - Nizozemsko

Počet stran výsledku

8

Strana od-do

1635-1642

Kód UT WoS článku

001043328800005

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85127347064