-
Something wrong with this record ?
A comparison of perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic versus open nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis
L. Afferi, M. Abufaraj, F. Soria, D. D'Andrea, E. Xylinas, T. Seisen, M. Roupret, C. Lonati, A. DE LA Taille, B. Peyronnet, E. Laukhtina, B. Pradere, A. Mari, W. Krajewski, M. Alvarez-Maestro, E. Kikuchi, K. Shigeta, P. Chlosta, F. Montorsi, A....
Language English Country Italy
Document type Journal Article
- MeSH
- Carcinoma, Transitional Cell * MeSH
- Laparoscopy * adverse effects methods MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Urinary Bladder Neoplasms * surgery MeSH
- Ureteral Neoplasms * MeSH
- Nephroureterectomy methods MeSH
- Retrospective Studies MeSH
- Propensity Score MeSH
- Check Tag
- Humans MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
BACKGROUND: Radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) with the concomitant excision of the distal ureter and bladder cuff is the current standard of care for the treatment of muscle invasive and/or high-risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). In small uncontrolled studies, laparoscopic RNU has been suggested to be associated with better perioperative outcomes compared to open RNU. The aim of our study was to compare the perioperative oncological and functional outcomes of open RNU versus laparoscopic RNU after adjusting for preoperative baseline patient-related characteristics. METHODS: We evaluated a multi-institutional retrospective database composed by 1512 patients diagnosed with UTUC and treated with open or laparoscopic RNU between 1990 and 2016. Perioperative outcomes included operative time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay, as well as postoperative complications, readmission, reoperation, and mortality rates at 30 and 90 days from surgery. A 1:1 propensity score matching estimated using logistic regression with the teffects psmatch function of STATA 13® (caliper 0.2, no replacement; StataCorp LLC; College Station, TX, USA) was performed using preoperative parameters such as: age, gender, Body Mass Index (BMI), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Score. RESULTS: Overall, 1007 (66.6%) patients were treated with open and 505 (33.4%) with laparoscopic RNU. Open RNU resulted into shorter median operative time (180 vs. 230 min, P<0.001) and longer median hospital stay (10 vs. 7 days, P<0.001) in comparison to laparoscopic RNU. No statistically significant difference was identified for the other variables of interest (all P>0.05). At multivariable linear regression after propensity score matching adjusted for lymph node dissection and year of surgery, laparoscopic RNU resulted in longer operative time (coefficient 43.6, 95% CI 27.9-59.3, P<0.001) and shorter hospital stay (coefficient -1.27, 95% CI -2.1 to -0.3, P=0.01) compared to open RNU, but the risk of other perioperative complications remained similar between the two treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic RNU is associated with shorter hospital stay, but longer operative time in comparison to open RNU. Otherwise, there were no differences in other perioperative outcomes between these surgical modalities even after propensity score matching. The choice to offer laparoscopic or open RNU in the treatment of UTUC should not be based on concerns of different safety outcomes.
Department of Urology 2nd Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prague Czech Republic
Department of Urology and Oncologic Urology Wroclaw Medical University Wroclaw Poland
Department of Urology and quot
Department of Urology Bichat Hospital Paris Descartes University Paris France
Department of Urology Careggi Hospital University of Florence Florence Italy
Department of Urology Hopital Pontchaillou Rennes University of Rennes Rennes France
Department of Urology Jagiellonian University Krakow Poland
Department of Urology La Paz University Hospital Madrid Spain
Department of Urology Luzerner Kantonsspital Lucerne Switzerland
Department of Urology Southwestern Medical Center Dallas University of Texas TX USA
Department of Urology University of Brescia Spedali Civili Hospital Brescia Italy
Department of Urology University of Montreal Montreal QC Canada
Department of Urology University of Verona Verona Italy
Department of Urology Vienna General Hospital University Hospital of Vienna Vienna Austria
Department of Urology Weill Cornell Medical College New York NY USA
Division of Urology Department of Surgical Sciences University of Turin Turin Italy
Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health Sechenov University Moscow Russia
National Cancer Institute Rome Italy
National Center for Diabetes Endocrinology and Genetics University of Jordan Amman Jordan
School of Medicine Department of Urology Keio University Tokyo Japan
School of Medicine Department of Urology Kitasato University Kanagawa Japan
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc22011194
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20220506131531.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 220425s2022 it f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.23736/S2724-6051.20.04127-2 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)33439575
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a it
- 100 1_
- $a Afferi, Luca $u Department of Urology, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, Switzerland - luca.afferi@gmail.com
- 245 12
- $a A comparison of perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic versus open nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis / $c L. Afferi, M. Abufaraj, F. Soria, D. D'Andrea, E. Xylinas, T. Seisen, M. Roupret, C. Lonati, A. DE LA Taille, B. Peyronnet, E. Laukhtina, B. Pradere, A. Mari, W. Krajewski, M. Alvarez-Maestro, E. Kikuchi, K. Shigeta, P. Chlosta, F. Montorsi, A. Briganti, G. Simone, PI. Ornaghi, MA. Cerruto, A. Antonelli, K. Matsumoto, PI. Karakiewicz, L. Mordasini, A. Mattei, SF. Shariat, M. Moschini
- 520 9_
- $a BACKGROUND: Radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) with the concomitant excision of the distal ureter and bladder cuff is the current standard of care for the treatment of muscle invasive and/or high-risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). In small uncontrolled studies, laparoscopic RNU has been suggested to be associated with better perioperative outcomes compared to open RNU. The aim of our study was to compare the perioperative oncological and functional outcomes of open RNU versus laparoscopic RNU after adjusting for preoperative baseline patient-related characteristics. METHODS: We evaluated a multi-institutional retrospective database composed by 1512 patients diagnosed with UTUC and treated with open or laparoscopic RNU between 1990 and 2016. Perioperative outcomes included operative time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay, as well as postoperative complications, readmission, reoperation, and mortality rates at 30 and 90 days from surgery. A 1:1 propensity score matching estimated using logistic regression with the teffects psmatch function of STATA 13® (caliper 0.2, no replacement; StataCorp LLC; College Station, TX, USA) was performed using preoperative parameters such as: age, gender, Body Mass Index (BMI), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Score. RESULTS: Overall, 1007 (66.6%) patients were treated with open and 505 (33.4%) with laparoscopic RNU. Open RNU resulted into shorter median operative time (180 vs. 230 min, P<0.001) and longer median hospital stay (10 vs. 7 days, P<0.001) in comparison to laparoscopic RNU. No statistically significant difference was identified for the other variables of interest (all P>0.05). At multivariable linear regression after propensity score matching adjusted for lymph node dissection and year of surgery, laparoscopic RNU resulted in longer operative time (coefficient 43.6, 95% CI 27.9-59.3, P<0.001) and shorter hospital stay (coefficient -1.27, 95% CI -2.1 to -0.3, P=0.01) compared to open RNU, but the risk of other perioperative complications remained similar between the two treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic RNU is associated with shorter hospital stay, but longer operative time in comparison to open RNU. Otherwise, there were no differences in other perioperative outcomes between these surgical modalities even after propensity score matching. The choice to offer laparoscopic or open RNU in the treatment of UTUC should not be based on concerns of different safety outcomes.
- 650 12
- $a karcinom z přechodných buněk $7 D002295
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 12
- $a laparoskopie $x škodlivé účinky $x metody $7 D010535
- 650 _2
- $a nefroureterektomie $x metody $7 D000074682
- 650 _2
- $a tendenční skóre $7 D057216
- 650 _2
- $a retrospektivní studie $7 D012189
- 650 12
- $a nádory močovodu $7 D014516
- 650 12
- $a nádory močového měchýře $x chirurgie $7 D001749
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Abufaraj, Mohammad $u Department of Urology, Vienna General Hospital, University Hospital of Vienna, Vienna, Austria $u Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan $u National Center for Diabetes, Endocrinology and Genetics, University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
- 700 1_
- $a Soria, Francesco $u Department of Urology, Vienna General Hospital, University Hospital of Vienna, Vienna, Austria $u Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
- 700 1_
- $a D'Andrea, David $u Department of Urology, Vienna General Hospital, University Hospital of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- 700 1_
- $a Xylinas, Evanguelos $u Department of Urology Bichat Hospital, Paris Descartes University, Paris, France
- 700 1_
- $a Seisen, Thomas $u Pierre et Marie Curie Medical School, Department of Urology, Pitié-Salpétrière Hospital, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris (APHP), University of Paris6, Paris, France
- 700 1_
- $a Roupret, Morgan $u Pierre et Marie Curie Medical School, Department of Urology, Pitié-Salpétrière Hospital, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris (APHP), University of Paris6, Paris, France
- 700 1_
- $a Lonati, Chiara $u Department of Urology, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, Switzerland $u Department of Urology, University of Brescia, Spedali Civili Hospital, Brescia, Italy
- 700 1_
- $a DE LA Taille, Alexandre $u Department of Urology, Henri-Mondor University Hospital, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris (APHP), Paris, France
- 700 1_
- $a Peyronnet, Benoit $u Department of Urology, Hopital Pontchaillou (CHU) Rennes, University of Rennes, Rennes, France
- 700 1_
- $a Laukhtina, Ekaterina $u Department of Urology, Vienna General Hospital, University Hospital of Vienna, Vienna, Austria $u Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
- 700 1_
- $a Pradere, Benjamin $u Department of Urology, Vienna General Hospital, University Hospital of Vienna, Vienna, Austria $u Department of Urology, Tenon Hospital, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris (APHP), Pierre et Marie Curie University, Paris, France
- 700 1_
- $a Mari, Andrea $u Department of Urology, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
- 700 1_
- $a Krajewski, Wojciech $u Department of Urology and Oncologic Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland
- 700 1_
- $a Alvarez-Maestro, Mario $u Department of Urology, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain
- 700 1_
- $a Kikuchi, Eiji $u School of Medicine, Department of Urology, Keio University, Tokyo, Japan
- 700 1_
- $a Shigeta, Keisuke $u School of Medicine, Department of Urology, Keio University, Tokyo, Japan
- 700 1_
- $a Chlosta, Piotr $u Department of Urology, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland
- 700 1_
- $a Montorsi, Francesco $u Department of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
- 700 1_
- $a Briganti, Alberto $u Department of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
- 700 1_
- $a Simone, Giuseppe $u Department of Urology, "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
- 700 1_
- $a Ornaghi, Paola I $u Department of Urology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
- 700 1_
- $a Cerruto, Maria A $u Department of Urology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
- 700 1_
- $a Antonelli, Alessandro $u Department of Urology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
- 700 1_
- $a Matsumoto, Kazumasa $u School of Medicine, Department of Urology, Kitasato University, Kanagawa, Japan
- 700 1_
- $a Karakiewicz, Pierre I $u Department of Urology, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada
- 700 1_
- $a Mordasini, Livio $u Department of Urology, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, Switzerland
- 700 1_
- $a Mattei, Agostino $u Department of Urology, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, Switzerland
- 700 1_
- $a Shariat, Shahrokh F $u Department of Urology, Vienna General Hospital, University Hospital of Vienna, Vienna, Austria $u Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia $u Department of Urology, Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, University of Texas, TX, USA $u Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA $u Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Moschini, Marco $u Department of Urology, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, Switzerland $u Department of Urology, Vienna General Hospital, University Hospital of Vienna, Vienna, Austria $u Department of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
- 773 0_
- $w MED00208300 $t Minerva urology and nephrology $x 2724-6442 $g Roč. 74, č. 1 (2022), s. 49-56
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33439575 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20220425 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20220506131523 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1789012 $s 1162392
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2022 $b 74 $c 1 $d 49-56 $e 20210113 $i 2724-6442 $m Minerva urology and nephrology $n Minerva Urol Nephrol $x MED00208300
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20220425
