Rodrigo Suarez-Ibarrola1, Simon Hein2, Erik Farin3, Frank Waldbillig4, Maximilian C Kriegmair4, Manuel Ritter5, Hans C Klingler6,7, Thomas R W Herrmann8, Christian Gratzke2, Arkadiusz Miernik2. 1. Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg Medical Centre, Freiburg, Germany, rodrigo.suarez@uniklinik-freiburg.de. 2. Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg Medical Centre, Freiburg, Germany. 3. Section of Health Care Research and Rehabilitation Research, University of Freiburg Medical Centre, Freiburg, Germany. 4. Department of Urology, University Hospital Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany. 5. Department of Urology and Pediatric Urology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany. 6. Department of Urology and Pediatric Urology, Wilhelminenspital, Vienna, Austria. 7. Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 8. Department of Urology, Spital Thurgau AG, Frauenfeld, Switzerland.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: To assess the current diagnostic, treatment, and documentation strategies for bladder cancer (BC) in German-speaking countries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 14-item web-based survey was distributed among members of the German, Austrian, and Swiss Associations of Urology, addressing physicians who perform cystoscopies and transurethral resection of bladder tumors (TURB). RESULTS: The survey was responded to by 308 of 5,564 urologists with a mean age of 49.5 years (response rate: 5.5%). The majority of participants (57.3%) practice in an outpatient setting. White light cystoscopy only is used by 60.2%, with additional photodynamic diagnosis and narrow band imaging by 36.8 and 12.5%, respectively. Endoscopic findings are documented in written form by 93.5%, followed by image capture (33.7%) and a central data archive (20.8%). Inpatient hospital urologists document cystoscopic findings by freehand drawing (21.4 vs. 11.4%, p = 0.017), and with a fixed bladder scheme (31.3 vs. 7.4%, <0.05) significantly more frequently. Cystoscopic findings are mainly conveyed to other health professionals in written form (77.4%), and significantly more often by inpatient urologists (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences exist in the approach to documenting and communicating cystoscopic BC findings. Accurate graphic documentation of lesions, visualization of the mucosa's totality, and meticulous consultation of previous surgical reports require improvements to reduce recurrence and progression rates.
INTRODUCTION: To assess the current diagnostic, treatment, and documentation strategies for bladder cancer (BC) in German-speaking countries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 14-item web-based survey was distributed among members of the German, Austrian, and Swiss Associations of Urology, addressing physicians who perform cystoscopies and transurethral resection of bladder tumors (TURB). RESULTS: The survey was responded to by 308 of 5,564 urologists with a mean age of 49.5 years (response rate: 5.5%). The majority of participants (57.3%) practice in an outpatient setting. White light cystoscopy only is used by 60.2%, with additional photodynamic diagnosis and narrow band imaging by 36.8 and 12.5%, respectively. Endoscopic findings are documented in written form by 93.5%, followed by image capture (33.7%) and a central data archive (20.8%). Inpatient hospital urologists document cystoscopic findings by freehand drawing (21.4 vs. 11.4%, p = 0.017), and with a fixed bladder scheme (31.3 vs. 7.4%, <0.05) significantly more frequently. Cystoscopic findings are mainly conveyed to other health professionals in written form (77.4%), and significantly more often by inpatient urologists (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences exist in the approach to documenting and communicating cystoscopic BC findings. Accurate graphic documentation of lesions, visualization of the mucosa's totality, and meticulous consultation of previous surgical reports require improvements to reduce recurrence and progression rates.
Authors: M C Kriegmair; S Hein; D S Schoeb; H Zappe; R Suárez-Ibarrola; F Waldbillig; B Gruene; P-F Pohlmann; F Praus; K Wilhelm; C Gratzke; A Miernik; C Bolenz Journal: Urologe A Date: 2020-12-10 Impact factor: 0.639
Authors: Alexander Marquardt; Mario Richterstetter; Helge Taubert; Arndt Hartmann; Bernd Wullich; Verena Lieb; Laura Bellut; Sven Wach; Hendrik Apel Journal: Life (Basel) Date: 2022-04-26
Authors: S O'Sullivan; M Janssen; Andreas Holzinger; Nathalie Nevejans; O Eminaga; C P Meyer; Arkadiusz Miernik Journal: World J Urol Date: 2022-01-27 Impact factor: 3.661
Authors: Reuben Ben-David; Samuel Morgan; Ziv Savin; Snir Dekalo; Mario Sofer; Avi Beri; Ofer Yossepowitch; Roy Mano Journal: Urol Int Date: 2021-07-20 Impact factor: 2.089