Literature DB >> 25327474

A prognostic model for survival after palliative urinary diversion for malignant ureteric obstruction: a prospective study of 208 patients.

Maurício D Cordeiro1, Rafael F Coelho1, Daher C Chade1, Rodrigo R Pessoa1, Mateus S Chaib1, José R Colombo-Júnior1, José Pontes-Júnior1, Giuliano B Guglielmetti1, Miguel Srougi1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with survival after palliative urinary diversion (UD) for patients with malignant ureteric obstruction (MUO) and create a risk-stratification model for treatment decisions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We prospectively collected clinical and laboratory data for patients who underwent palliative UD by ureteric stenting or percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) between 1 January 2009 and 1 November 2011 in two tertiary care university hospitals, with a minimum 6-month follow-up. Inclusion criteria were age >18 years and MUO confirmed by computed tomography, ultrasonography or magnetic resonance imaging. Factors related to poor prognosis were identified by Cox univariable and multivariable regression analyses, and a risk stratification model was created by Kaplan-Meier survival estimates at 1, 6 and 12 months, and log-rank tests.
RESULTS: The median (range) survival was 144 (0-1084) days for the 208 patients included after UD (58 ureteric stenting, 150 PCN); 164 patients died, 44 (21.2%) during hospitalisation. Overall survival did not differ by UD type (P = 0.216). The number of events related to malignancy (≥4) and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) index (≥2) were associated with short survival on multivariable analysis. These two risk factors were used to divide patients into three groups by survival type: favourable (no factors), intermediate (one factor) and unfavourable (two factors). The median survival at 1, 6, and 12 months was 94.4%, 57.3% and 44.9% in the favourable group; 78.0%, 36.3%, and 15.5% in the intermediate group; and 46.4%, 14.3%, and 7.1% in the unfavourable group (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Our stratification model may be useful to determine whether UD is indicated for patients with MUO.
© 2014 The Authors BJU International © 2014 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  hydronephrosis; palliative surgery; percutaneous nephrostomy; stent; survival; ureteric obstruction

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25327474     DOI: 10.1111/bju.12963

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  9 in total

Review 1.  Use of percutaneous nephrostomy and ureteral stenting in management of ureteral obstruction.

Authors:  Linda Hsu; Hanhan Li; Daniel Pucheril; Moritz Hansen; Raymond Littleton; James Peabody; Jesse Sammon
Journal:  World J Nephrol       Date:  2016-03-06

2.  Percutaneous nephrostomy in obstructing pelvic malignancy does not facilitate further oncological treatment.

Authors:  Samuel Stephen Folkard; Srijit Banerjee; Richard Menzies-Wilson; Joseph Reason; Evangelos Psallidas; Elliot Clissold; Ahmad Al-Mushatat; Saurabh Chaudhri; James Stephen Arthur Green
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2020-04-22       Impact factor: 2.370

3.  Comparison of single and tandem ureteral stenting for malignant ureteral obstruction: a prospective study of 104 patients.

Authors:  Kao-Lang Liu; Bo-Ching Lee; Jian-De Ye; Yu-Hsuan Chang; Chin-Chen Chang; Kuo-How Huang; Yuan-Ju Lee; Yeun-Chung Chang
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-07-04       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 4.  [Management of ureteral obstruction : Value of percutaneous nephrostomy and ureteral stents].

Authors:  C Netsch; B Becker; A J Gross
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 0.639

5.  Can preoperative ureteral stents reduce the incidence of ureteral stricture after radiotherapy in patients with cervical cancer?

Authors:  Liang Liu; Chunhong Yu; Fuzhen Sun; Tao Yang; Dong Wei; Gang Wang; Shoubin Li; Junjiang Liu
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 2.090

Review 6.  Malignant ureteric obstruction decompression: how much gain for how much pain? A narrative review.

Authors:  Joanna Prentice; Tarik Amer; Ali Tasleem; Omar Aboumarzouk
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 5.344

7.  A novel risk classification score for malignant ureteral obstruction: a multicenter prospective validation study.

Authors:  Kouji Izumi; Takashi Shima; Kazuyoshi Shigehara; Kiyoshi Sawada; Renato Naito; Yuki Kato; Mitsuo Ofude; Hiroshi Kano; Hiroaki Iwamoto; Hiroshi Yaegashi; Kazufumi Nakashima; Masashi Iijima; Shohei Kawaguchi; Takahiro Nohara; Yoshifumi Kadono; Atsushi Mizokami
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-02-24       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Postrenal Azotemia in a Gastric Cancer Patient Revealed the Coincidence of Ureteral Metastasis and Contralateral Ureteral Stone: A Case Report.

Authors:  Fateme Guitynavard; Seyed Saeed Tamehri Zadeh; Mohammad Mehdi Rakebi; Arezoo Eftekhar Javadi; Seyed Mohammad Kazem Aghamir
Journal:  Case Rep Oncol       Date:  2021-11-18

9.  Predictors of nadir serum creatinine after drainage of bilaterally obstructed kidneys due to different etiologies.

Authors:  Rabea Ahmed Gadelkareem; Ahmed Mahmoud Abdelraouf; Ahmed Mohammed El-Taher; Abdelfattah Ibrahim Ahmed; Nasreldin Mohammed
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2022-07-06       Impact factor: 2.266

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.