PURPOSE: A re-transurethral resection of the bladder (re-TURB) is a well-established approach in managing non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) for various reasons: repeat-TURB is recommended for a macroscopically incomplete initial resection, restaging-TURB is required if the first resection was macroscopically complete but contained no detrusor muscle (DM) and second-TURB is advised for all completely resected T1-tumors with DM in the resection specimen. This study assessed the long-term outcomes after repeat-, second-, and restaging-TURB in T1-NMIBC patients. METHODS: Individual patient data with tumor characteristics of 1660 primary T1-patients (muscle-invasion at re-TURB omitted) diagnosed from 1990 to 2018 in 17 hospitals were analyzed. Time to recurrence, progression, death due to bladder cancer (BC), and all causes (OS) were visualized with cumulative incidence functions and analyzed by log-rank tests and multivariable Cox-regression models stratified by institution. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 45.3 (IQR 22.7-81.1) months. There were no differences in time to recurrence, progression, or OS between patients undergoing restaging (135 patients), second (644 patients), or repeat-TURB (84 patients), nor between patients who did or who did not undergo second or restaging-TURB. However, patients who underwent repeat-TURB had a shorter time to BC death compared to those who had second- or restaging-TURB (multivariable HR 3.58, P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Prognosis did not significantly differ between patients who underwent restaging- or second-TURB. However, a worse prognosis in terms of death due to bladder cancer was found in patients who underwent repeat-TURB compared to second-TURB and restaging-TURB, highlighting the importance of separately evaluating different indications for re-TURB.

• Klíčová slova
• Non-muscle invasive bladder cancer, Prognosis, Re-TURB, Repeat TURB, Restaging TURB, Second TURB,
• MeSH
• cystektomie MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• močový měchýř chirurgie   patologie   MeSH
• nádory močového měchýře neinvadující svalovinu * MeSH
• nádory močového měchýře * chirurgie   patologie   MeSH
• prognóza MeSH
• staging nádorů MeSH
• urologické chirurgické výkony MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH

BACKGROUND: Grade of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is an important prognostic factor for progression. Currently, two World Health Organization (WHO) classification systems (WHO1973, categories: grade 1-3, and WHO2004 categories: papillary urothelial neoplasm of low malignant potential [PUNLMP], low-grade [LG], high-grade [HG] carcinoma) are used. OBJECTIVE: To ask the European Association of Urology (EAU) and International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) members regarding their current practice and preferences of grading systems. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A web-based, anonymous questionnaire with ten questions on grading of NMIBC was created. The members of EAU and ISUP were invited to complete an online survey by the end of 2021. Thirteen experts had previously answered the same questions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The submitted answers from 214 ISUP members, 191 EAU members, and 13 experts were analyzed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Currently, 53% use only the WHO2004 system and 40% use both systems. According to most respondents, PUNLMP is a rare diagnosis with management similar to Ta-LG carcinoma. The majority (72%) would consider reverting back to WHO1973 if grading criteria were more detailed. Separate reporting of WHO1973-G3 within WHO2004-HG would influence clinical decisions for Ta and/or T1 tumors according the majority (55%). Most respondents preferred a two-tier (41%) or a three-tier (41%) grading system. The current WHO2004 grading system is supported by a minority (20%), whereas nearly half (48%) supported a hybrid three- or four-tier grading system composed of both WHO1973 and WHO2004. The survey results of the experts were comparable with ISUP and EAU respondents. CONCLUSIONS: Both the WHO1973 and the WHO2004 grading system are still widely used. Even though opinions on the future of bladder cancer grading were strongly divided, there was limited support for WHO1973 and WHO2004 in their current formats, while the hybrid (three-tier) grading system with LG, HG-G2, and HG-G3 as categories could be considered the most promising alternative. PATIENT SUMMARY: Grading of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is a matter of ongoing debate and lacks international consensus. We surveyed urologists and pathologists of European Association of Urology and International Society of Urological Pathology on their preferences regarding NMIBC grading to generate a multidisciplinary dialogue. Both the "old" World Health Organization (WHO) 1973 and the "new" WHO2004 grading schemes are still used widely. However, continuation of both the WHO1973 and the WHO2004 system showed limited support, while a hybrid grading system composed of both the WHO1973 and the WHO2004 classification system may be considered a promising alternative.

• Klíčová slova
• Bladder, Cancer, European Association of Urology, Grading, International Society of Urological Pathology, Survey, WHO1973, WHO2004,
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the clinical, oncological, and pathological impact of en bloc resection of bladder tumors (ERBT) compared with conventional transurethral resection of bladder tumors (cTURBT) for pT1 high-grade (HG) bladder cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the record of 326 patients (cTURBT: n = 216, ERBT: n = 110) diagnosed with pT1 HG bladder cancer at multiple institutions. The cohorts were matched by one-to-one propensity scores based on patient and tumor demographics. Recurrence-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and perioperative and pathologic outcomes were compared. The prognosticators of RFS and PFS were analyzed using the Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: After matching, 202 patients (cTURBT: n = 101, ERBT: n = 101) were retained. There were no differences in perioperative outcomes between the two procedures. The 3-year RFS, PFS, and CSS were not different between the two procedures (p = 0.7, 1, and 0.7, respectively). Among patients who underwent repeat transurethral resection (reTUR), the rate of any residue on reTUR was significantly lower in the ERBT group (cTURBT: 36% versus ERBT: 15%, p = 0.029). Adequate sampling of muscularis propria (83% versus 93%, p = 0.029) and diagnostic rates of pT1a/b substaging (90% versus 100%, p < 0.001) were significantly better in ERBT specimen compared with cTURBT specimen. On multivariable analyses, pT1a/b substaging was a prognosticator of disease progression. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with pT1HG bladder cancer, ERBT had similar perioperative and mid-term oncologic outcomes compared with cTURBT. However, ERBT improves the quality of resection and specimen, yielding less residue on reTUR and yielding superior histopathologic information such as substaging.

• MeSH
• cystektomie MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• nádory močového měchýře * chirurgie   patologie   MeSH
• retrospektivní studie MeSH
• tendenční skóre MeSH
• urologické chirurgické výkony metody   MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH