Vše

Co hledáte?

Vše
Projekty
Výsledky výzkumu
Subjekty

Rychlé hledání

  • Projekty podpořené TA ČR
  • Významné projekty
  • Projekty s nejvyšší státní podporou
  • Aktuálně běžící projekty

Chytré vyhledávání

  • Takto najdu konkrétní +slovo
  • Takto z výsledků -slovo zcela vynechám
  • “Takto můžu najít celou frázi”

An international multicentre randomised controlled trial of en bloc resection of bladder tumour vs conventional transurethral resection of bladder tumour: first results of the en bloc resection of urothelium carcinoma of the bladder (EBRUC) II trial

Identifikátory výsledku

  • Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00064203%3A_____%2F25%3A10486793" target="_blank" >RIV/00064203:_____/25:10486793 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Nalezeny alternativní kódy

    RIV/00216208:11130/25:10486793

  • Výsledek na webu

    <a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=7.De-CPv24" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=7.De-CPv24</a>

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bju.16543" target="_blank" >10.1111/bju.16543</a>

Alternativní jazyky

  • Jazyk výsledku

    angličtina

  • Název v původním jazyce

    An international multicentre randomised controlled trial of en bloc resection of bladder tumour vs conventional transurethral resection of bladder tumour: first results of the en bloc resection of urothelium carcinoma of the bladder (EBRUC) II trial

  • Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

    OBJECTIVES: To determine the safety and oncological advantages of en bloc resection of bladder tumour (ERBT) vs conventional transurethral resection of bladder tumour (cTURBT) in terms of resection quality, staging quality, and safety. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a single-blinded randomised controlled trial at seven European hospitals with the following inclusion criteria: first diagnosis of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer, no singular carcinoma in situ, and tumour size &gt;4.3 mm. Patients were randomised intraoperatively in a 1:1 ratio to either the ERBT or cTURBT group. Outcome analysis was performed using the chi-square test, t-test, and multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 97 patients were randomised into the study (cTURBT = 40, ERBT = 57). A switch to cTURBT was necessary in two patients (3.5%) and 11.5% of the screened patients were preoperatively excluded for ERBT. There was no difference in the specimen presence of detrusor muscle with 73.7% in cTURBT and 67.3% in ERBT specimens (P = 0.69). There were no significant differences in mean operative time (ERBT 27.6 vs cTURBT 25.4 min, P = 0.450) or mean resection time (ERBT 16.3 vs cTURBT 15.5 min, P = 0.732). Overall the complication rate did not differ significantly (ERBT 18.2% vs cTURBT 7.5%, P = 0.142). Bladder perforations occurred significantly more often in the ERBT group (ERBT seven vs cTURBT none, P = 0.020). R0 status was reported more often after ERBT, whilst a second resection was significantly less frequent after ERBT (P = 0.018). Recurrence rates were comparable for both techniques after 6 months of follow-up. CONCLUSION: The feasibility of ERBT is higher than previously reported. Whereas other perioperative and safety parameters are comparable to cTURBT, bladder perforations occurred significantly more often in the ERBT group and raised safety concerns. This is why this trial was terminated.

  • Název v anglickém jazyce

    An international multicentre randomised controlled trial of en bloc resection of bladder tumour vs conventional transurethral resection of bladder tumour: first results of the en bloc resection of urothelium carcinoma of the bladder (EBRUC) II trial

  • Popis výsledku anglicky

    OBJECTIVES: To determine the safety and oncological advantages of en bloc resection of bladder tumour (ERBT) vs conventional transurethral resection of bladder tumour (cTURBT) in terms of resection quality, staging quality, and safety. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a single-blinded randomised controlled trial at seven European hospitals with the following inclusion criteria: first diagnosis of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer, no singular carcinoma in situ, and tumour size &gt;4.3 mm. Patients were randomised intraoperatively in a 1:1 ratio to either the ERBT or cTURBT group. Outcome analysis was performed using the chi-square test, t-test, and multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 97 patients were randomised into the study (cTURBT = 40, ERBT = 57). A switch to cTURBT was necessary in two patients (3.5%) and 11.5% of the screened patients were preoperatively excluded for ERBT. There was no difference in the specimen presence of detrusor muscle with 73.7% in cTURBT and 67.3% in ERBT specimens (P = 0.69). There were no significant differences in mean operative time (ERBT 27.6 vs cTURBT 25.4 min, P = 0.450) or mean resection time (ERBT 16.3 vs cTURBT 15.5 min, P = 0.732). Overall the complication rate did not differ significantly (ERBT 18.2% vs cTURBT 7.5%, P = 0.142). Bladder perforations occurred significantly more often in the ERBT group (ERBT seven vs cTURBT none, P = 0.020). R0 status was reported more often after ERBT, whilst a second resection was significantly less frequent after ERBT (P = 0.018). Recurrence rates were comparable for both techniques after 6 months of follow-up. CONCLUSION: The feasibility of ERBT is higher than previously reported. Whereas other perioperative and safety parameters are comparable to cTURBT, bladder perforations occurred significantly more often in the ERBT group and raised safety concerns. This is why this trial was terminated.

Klasifikace

  • Druh

    J<sub>imp</sub> - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

  • CEP obor

  • OECD FORD obor

    30217 - Urology and nephrology

Návaznosti výsledku

  • Projekt

  • Návaznosti

    I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Ostatní

  • Rok uplatnění

    2025

  • Kód důvěrnosti údajů

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

Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku

  • Název periodika

    B.J.U. International

  • ISSN

    1464-4096

  • e-ISSN

    1464-410X

  • Svazek periodika

    135

  • Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

    3

  • Stát vydavatele periodika

    GB - Spojené království Velké Británie a Severního Irska

  • Počet stran výsledku

    10

  • Strana od-do

    446-455

  • Kód UT WoS článku

    001343013100001

  • EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

    2-s2.0-85207767656