• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Best Practices to Optimise Quality and Outcomes of Transurethral Resection of Bladder Tumours

H. Mostafid, AM. Kamat, S. Daneshmand, J. Palou, JA. Taylor, J. McKiernan, J. Catto, M. Babjuk, M. Soloway

. 2021 ; 4 (1) : 12-19. [pub] 20200716

Jazyk angličtina Země Nizozemsko

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, přehledy

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc22004645

CONTEXT: Transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TURBT) for bladder cancer (BC) is an underappreciated common urological procedure. TURBT outcomes are highly variable, and results are dependent on judgement and surgical skill. OBJECTIVE: To perform a narrative review and identify optimal best practice in TURBT including preparation, choice of equipment, procedural steps, surgical technique, and management of difficult scenarios and complications. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. Important studies were identified and reviewed by an international panel of urologists representing major urological societies and guideline panels with a record of academic publication in this field. In areas where the group identified a lack of evidence or agreement, discussions took place until a consensus was reached. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 814 studies were identified and 43 were included. The majority were retrospective (level of evidence 3), with only two prospective randomised trials. Four broad themes were identified, which formed the basis for the review: (1) the role of TURBT within the overall management of BC, (2) TURBT techniques, (3) measurement of outcomes including quality control and checklists, and (4) postoperative management. Familiarity with all aspects of the procedure is necessary to minimise morbidity and improve oncological outcomes. Development of new instruments and techniques, and prospective audit of TURBT outcomes are important future goals. CONCLUSIONS: TURBT is a common and challenging operation with known variable outcomes. To reduce these variations and optimise outcomes, best practice based on evidence and expert opinion is recommended. PATIENT SUMMARY: Transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TURBT) is a common but deceptively difficult urological operation. Optimal outcomes depend on experience and surgical skill. An international group of experienced TURBT surgeons review critical aspects of the procedure and share best practice to stimulate further discussion.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc22004645
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20220127145107.0
007      
ta
008      
220113s2021 ne f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1016/j.euo.2020.06.010 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)32684515
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a ne
100    1_
$a Mostafid, Hugh $u Stokes Centre for Urology, Royal Surrey Hospital, Guildford, UK. Electronic address: Hugh.Mostafid@nhs.net
245    10
$a Best Practices to Optimise Quality and Outcomes of Transurethral Resection of Bladder Tumours / $c H. Mostafid, AM. Kamat, S. Daneshmand, J. Palou, JA. Taylor, J. McKiernan, J. Catto, M. Babjuk, M. Soloway
520    9_
$a CONTEXT: Transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TURBT) for bladder cancer (BC) is an underappreciated common urological procedure. TURBT outcomes are highly variable, and results are dependent on judgement and surgical skill. OBJECTIVE: To perform a narrative review and identify optimal best practice in TURBT including preparation, choice of equipment, procedural steps, surgical technique, and management of difficult scenarios and complications. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. Important studies were identified and reviewed by an international panel of urologists representing major urological societies and guideline panels with a record of academic publication in this field. In areas where the group identified a lack of evidence or agreement, discussions took place until a consensus was reached. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 814 studies were identified and 43 were included. The majority were retrospective (level of evidence 3), with only two prospective randomised trials. Four broad themes were identified, which formed the basis for the review: (1) the role of TURBT within the overall management of BC, (2) TURBT techniques, (3) measurement of outcomes including quality control and checklists, and (4) postoperative management. Familiarity with all aspects of the procedure is necessary to minimise morbidity and improve oncological outcomes. Development of new instruments and techniques, and prospective audit of TURBT outcomes are important future goals. CONCLUSIONS: TURBT is a common and challenging operation with known variable outcomes. To reduce these variations and optimise outcomes, best practice based on evidence and expert opinion is recommended. PATIENT SUMMARY: Transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TURBT) is a common but deceptively difficult urological operation. Optimal outcomes depend on experience and surgical skill. An international group of experienced TURBT surgeons review critical aspects of the procedure and share best practice to stimulate further discussion.
650    _2
$a cystektomie $7 D015653
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a retrospektivní studie $7 D012189
650    12
$a nádory močového měchýře $x chirurgie $7 D001749
650    _2
$a urologické chirurgické výkony $7 D013520
650    _2
$a urologové $7 D000072178
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a přehledy $7 D016454
700    1_
$a Kamat, Ashish M $u Department of Urology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
700    1_
$a Daneshmand, Siamak $u Department of Urology, USC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
700    1_
$a Palou, Joan $u Department of Urology, Fundacio Puigvert, Universidad Autonoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
700    1_
$a Taylor, John A $u Department of Urology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA
700    1_
$a McKiernan, James $u Department of Urology, New York Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center, New York City, NY, USA
700    1_
$a Catto, James $u Academic Urology Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
700    1_
$a Babjuk, Marko $u Department of Urology, Hospital Motol, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Soloway, Mark $u Division of Urology, Memorial Hospital, Hollywood, FL, USA
773    0_
$w MED00205913 $t European urology oncology $x 2588-9311 $g Roč. 4, č. 1 (2021), s. 12-19
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32684515 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20220113 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20220127145103 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1751953 $s 1155794
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2021 $b 4 $c 1 $d 12-19 $e 20200716 $i 2588-9311 $m European urology oncology $n Eur Urol Oncol $x MED00205913
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20220113

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Pouze přihlášení uživatelé

Možnosti archivace