-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Diagnostic accuracy of bimanual palpation in bladder cancer patients undergoing cystectomy: A prospective study
AK. Czech, K. Gronostaj, J. Fronczek, J. Frydrych, V. Bezshapkin, M. Przydacz, P. Dudek, L. Curylo, T. Wiatr, J. Gasowski, PL. Chlosta
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
- MeSH
- cystektomie * metody MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- nádory močového měchýře * diagnóza chirurgie patologie MeSH
- palpace MeSH
- prediktivní hodnota testů MeSH
- prospektivní studie MeSH
- retrospektivní studie MeSH
- staging nádorů MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
OBJECTIVES: To prospectively assess the concordance of examination under anesthesia (EUA)-based clinical T stage with pathological T stage and diagnostic accuracy of EUA in patients with bladder cancer undergoing cystectomy. METHODS: Consecutive patients with bladder cancer undergoing cystectomy between June 2017 and October 2020 in a single academic center were included in a prospective study. Two urologists performed EUA (one blinded to imaging) before patients underwent cystectomy. We assessed the concordance between clinical T stage in bimanual palpation (index test) and pathological T stage in cystectomy specimens (reference test). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to detect or exclude locally advanced bladder cancer (pT3b-T4b) in EUA. RESULTS: The data of 134 patients were analyzed. Given that stage pT3a cannot be palpated, for the nonblinded examiner, T staging in EUA was concordant with pT in 107 (79.9%) patients, 20 (14.9%) cases being understaged in EUA and 7 (5.2%) overstaged. For the blinded examiner, staging was correct in 106 (79.1%) patients, 20 (14.9%) cases being understaged and 8 (6%) overstaged. For the nonblinded examiner, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of EUA were 55.9% (95% CI 39.2%-72.6%), 93% (88%-98%), 73.1% (56%-90.1%), and 86.1% (79.6%-92.6%), respectively; for the blinded examiner, they were 52.9% (36.2%-69.7%), 93% (88%-98%), 72% (54.4%-89.6%) and 85.3% (78.7%-92%), respectively. Awareness of imaging results did not have a major impact on EUA results. CONCLUSION: Bimanual palpation should still be used for clinical staging, given its specificity, NPV, and that it could correctly determine bladder cancer T stage in 80% of cases.
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc23016443
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20231026105820.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 231013s2023 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1016/j.urolonc.2023.04.001 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)37147232
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Czech, Anna K $u Department of Urology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland. Electronic address: aka.czech@uj.edu.pl
- 245 10
- $a Diagnostic accuracy of bimanual palpation in bladder cancer patients undergoing cystectomy: A prospective study / $c AK. Czech, K. Gronostaj, J. Fronczek, J. Frydrych, V. Bezshapkin, M. Przydacz, P. Dudek, L. Curylo, T. Wiatr, J. Gasowski, PL. Chlosta
- 520 9_
- $a OBJECTIVES: To prospectively assess the concordance of examination under anesthesia (EUA)-based clinical T stage with pathological T stage and diagnostic accuracy of EUA in patients with bladder cancer undergoing cystectomy. METHODS: Consecutive patients with bladder cancer undergoing cystectomy between June 2017 and October 2020 in a single academic center were included in a prospective study. Two urologists performed EUA (one blinded to imaging) before patients underwent cystectomy. We assessed the concordance between clinical T stage in bimanual palpation (index test) and pathological T stage in cystectomy specimens (reference test). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to detect or exclude locally advanced bladder cancer (pT3b-T4b) in EUA. RESULTS: The data of 134 patients were analyzed. Given that stage pT3a cannot be palpated, for the nonblinded examiner, T staging in EUA was concordant with pT in 107 (79.9%) patients, 20 (14.9%) cases being understaged in EUA and 7 (5.2%) overstaged. For the blinded examiner, staging was correct in 106 (79.1%) patients, 20 (14.9%) cases being understaged and 8 (6%) overstaged. For the nonblinded examiner, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of EUA were 55.9% (95% CI 39.2%-72.6%), 93% (88%-98%), 73.1% (56%-90.1%), and 86.1% (79.6%-92.6%), respectively; for the blinded examiner, they were 52.9% (36.2%-69.7%), 93% (88%-98%), 72% (54.4%-89.6%) and 85.3% (78.7%-92%), respectively. Awareness of imaging results did not have a major impact on EUA results. CONCLUSION: Bimanual palpation should still be used for clinical staging, given its specificity, NPV, and that it could correctly determine bladder cancer T stage in 80% of cases.
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 12
- $a cystektomie $x metody $7 D015653
- 650 _2
- $a prospektivní studie $7 D011446
- 650 12
- $a nádory močového měchýře $x diagnóza $x chirurgie $x patologie $7 D001749
- 650 _2
- $a prediktivní hodnota testů $7 D011237
- 650 _2
- $a palpace $7 D010173
- 650 _2
- $a staging nádorů $7 D009367
- 650 _2
- $a retrospektivní studie $7 D012189
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Gronostaj, Katarzyna $u Department of Urology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
- 700 1_
- $a Fronczek, Jakub $u Centre for Intensive Care and Perioperative Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
- 700 1_
- $a Frydrych, Jakub $u Department of Urology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
- 700 1_
- $a Bezshapkin, Valentyn $u Centre for Intensive Care and Perioperative Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
- 700 1_
- $a Przydacz, Mikolaj $u Department of Urology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
- 700 1_
- $a Dudek, Przemyslaw $u Department of Urology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
- 700 1_
- $a Curylo, Lukasz $u Department of Urology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
- 700 1_
- $a Wiatr, Tomasz $u Department of Urology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
- 700 1_
- $a Gasowski, Jerzy $u Department of Internal Medicine and Gerontology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
- 700 1_
- $a Chlosta, Piotr L $u Department of Urology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland
- 773 0_
- $w MED00008671 $t Urologic oncology $x 1873-2496 $g Roč. 41, č. 9 (2023), s. 390.e27-390.e33
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37147232 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20231013 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20231026105813 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 2000140 $s 1202805
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2023 $b 41 $c 9 $d 390.e27-390.e33 $e 20230503 $i 1873-2496 $m Urologic oncology $n Urol Oncol $x MED00008671
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20231013
