Literature DB >> 27993668

Early Oncologic Failure after Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy: Results from the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium.

Ahmed A Hussein1, Matthias Saar2, Paul R May3, Carl J Wijburg4, Lee Richstone5, Andrew Wagner6, Timothy Wilson7, Bertram Yuh7, Joan Palou Redorta8, Prokar Dasgupta9, Mohammad Shamim Khan9, Mani Menon10, James O Peabody10, Abolfazl Hosseini11, Franco Gaboardi12, Alexandre Mottrie13, Koon-Ho Rha14, Ashok Hemal15, Michael Stockle2, John Kelly16, Thomas J Maatman17, Abdullah Erdem Canda18, Peter Wiklund11, Khurshid A Guru19.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We sought to investigate the prevalence and variables associated with early oncologic failure.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the IRCC (International Radical Cystectomy Consortium) database of patients who underwent robot-assisted radical cystectomy since 2003. The final cohort comprised a total of 1,894 patients from 23 institutions in 11 countries. Early oncologic failure was defined as any disease relapse within 3 months of robot-assisted radical cystectomy. All institutions were surveyed for the pneumoperitoneum pressure used, breach of oncologic surgical principles, and techniques of specimen and lymph node removal. A multivariate model was fit to evaluate predictors of early oncologic failure. The Kaplan-Meier method was applied to depict disease specific and overall survival, and Cox proportional regression analysis was used to evaluate predictors of disease specific and overall survival.
RESULTS: A total of 305 patients (22%) experienced disease relapse, which was distant in 220 (16%), local recurrence in 154 (11%), peritoneal carcinomatosis in 17 (1%) and port site recurrence in 5 (0.4%). Early oncologic failure developed in 71 patients (5%) at a total of 10 institutions. The incidence of early oncologic failure decreased from 10% in 2006 to 6% in 2015. On multivariate analysis the presence of any complication (OR 2.87, 95% CI 1.38-5.96, p = 0.004), pT3 or greater disease (OR 3.73, 95% CI 2.00-6.97, p <0.001) and nodal involvement (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.21-3.80, p = 0.008) was a significant predictor of early oncologic failure. Patients with early oncologic failure demonstrated worse disease specific and overall survival (23% and 13%, respectively) at 1 and 3 years compared to patients who experienced later or no recurrences (log rank p <0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of early oncologic failure following robot-assisted radical cystectomy has decreased with time. Disease related rather than technical related factors have a major role in early oncologic failure after robot-assisted radical cystectomy.
Copyright © 2017 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cystectomy; local; neoplasm recurrence; robotic surgical procedures; treatment failure; urinary bladder neoplasms

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27993668     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.12.048

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  9 in total

1.  Intra-corporeal robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis comparing perioperative and long-term survival outcomes and recurrence patterns.

Authors:  Kenji Zennami; Makoto Sumitomo; Kiyoshi Takahara; Takuhisa Nukaya; Masashi Takenaka; Kosuke Fukaya; Manabu Ichino; Naohiko Fukami; Hitomi Sasaki; Mamoru Kusaka; Ryoichi Shiroki
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2021-05-19       Impact factor: 3.402

2.  Robotic assisted radical cystectomy: insights on long term oncological outcomes from the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium.

Authors:  Maria Chiara Sighinolfi; Salvatore Micali; Ahmed Eissa; Stefano Carlo Maria Picozzi; Stefano Puliatti; Bernardo Rocco
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2019-12

3.  Randomized Trial Comparing Open Radical Cystectomy and Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy: Oncologic Outcomes.

Authors:  Bernard H Bochner; Guido Dalbagni; Karim H Marzouk; Daniel D Sjoberg; Justin Lee; Sheri M Donat; Jonathan A Coleman; Andrew Vickers; Harry W Herr; Vincent P Laudone
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2018-05-18       Impact factor: 20.096

4.  Accurate Quantification of Residual Cancer Cells in Pelvic Washing Reveals Association with Cancer Recurrence Following Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy.

Authors:  Lei Wei; Ahmed A Hussein; Yingyu Ma; Gissou Azabdaftari; Youssef Ahmed; Lai Ping Wong; Qiang Hu; Wei Luo; Victoria N Cranwell; Brittany L Bunch; Justen D Kozlowski; Prashant K Singh; Sean T Glenn; Gary Smith; Candace S Johnson; Song Liu; Khurshid A Guru
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 7.600

5.  Robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion versus open radical cystectomy (iROC): protocol for a randomised controlled trial with internal feasibility study.

Authors:  James W F Catto; Pramit Khetrapal; Gareth Ambler; Rachael Sarpong; Muhammad Shamim Khan; Melanie Tan; Andrew Feber; Simon Dixon; Louise Goodwin; Norman R Williams; John McGrath; Edward Rowe; Anthony Koupparis; Chris Brew-Graves; John D Kelly
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-08-08       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 6.  Contemporary techniques and outcomes of robotic assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion.

Authors:  Ardenne S Martin; Anthony T Corcoran
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-05

Review 7.  Evidence of Atypical Recurrences After Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature.

Authors:  François Audenet; John P Sfakianos
Journal:  Bladder Cancer       Date:  2017-10-27

8.  Will long term oncologic follow-up make the case for robotic assisted radical cystectomy?

Authors:  Michael D Gross; Bashir Al Hussein Al Awamlh; Jim C Hu
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-12

9.  Does robotic radical cystectomy impede oncological outcome in bladder cancer patients?

Authors:  Günter Niegisch
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-12
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.