Reza Sari Motlagh1, Keiichiro Mori1,2, Abdulmajeed Aydh1,3, Pierre I Karakiewicz4, Quoc-Dien Trinh5, Shahrokh F Shariat1,6,7,8,9,10,11. 1. Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 2. Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan. 3. Department of Urology, King Faisal Medical City, Abha, Saudi Arabia. 4. Cancer Prognostics and Health outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 5. Division of Urological Surgery and Center for Surgery and Public Health, Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 6. Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan. 7. Department of Urology, Weil Cornell Medical College, New York, New York. 8. Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, Texas, USA. 9. Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria. 10. Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. 11. European Association of Urology Research Foundation, Arnhem, the Netherlands.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There is heightened awareness and trends towards centralizing high-risk, complex surgeries such as radical cystectomy to minimize complications and improve survival. However, after nearly a decade of mandated and/or passive centralization of care, debate regarding its benefits and harms continues. RECENT FINDINGS: During the past decade, mandated and passive centralization has led to an increase in radical cystectomies performed in high-volume hospitals (HVHs) and, perhaps by high-volume surgeons (HVS), in addition to efforts to increase the uptake of multidisciplinary strategies in the management of radical cystectomy patients. Consequently, 30 and 90-day mortality rates and overall survival have improved, and major complications and transfusion rates have decreased. Factors impacting surgical quality, such as negative surgical margin(s), pelvic lymphadenectomy and/or lymph node yield rates have increased. However, current studies have not demonstrated a coadditive impact of centralization on oncological outcomes (i.e. cancer-specific and recurrence-free survival). The benefits of centralization on oncologic survival of radical cystectomy remain unclear given the varied definitions of HVHs and HVSs across studies. In fact, centralization of radical cystectomy could lead to an increase in patient load in HVHs and for HVSs, thereby leading to longer surgery waiting times, a factor that is important in the management of muscle-invasive bladder cancer. SUMMARY: The benefits of centralization of radical cystectomy with multidisciplinary management are shown increasingly and convincingly. More studies are necessary to prospectively test the benefits, risks and harms of centralization.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There is heightened awareness and trends towards centralizing high-risk, complex surgeries such as radical cystectomy to minimize complications and improve survival. However, after nearly a decade of mandated and/or passive centralization of care, debate regarding its benefits and harms continues. RECENT FINDINGS: During the past decade, mandated and passive centralization has led to an increase in radical cystectomies performed in high-volume hospitals (HVHs) and, perhaps by high-volume surgeons (HVS), in addition to efforts to increase the uptake of multidisciplinary strategies in the management of radical cystectomy patients. Consequently, 30 and 90-day mortality rates and overall survival have improved, and major complications and transfusion rates have decreased. Factors impacting surgical quality, such as negative surgical margin(s), pelvic lymphadenectomy and/or lymph node yield rates have increased. However, current studies have not demonstrated a coadditive impact of centralization on oncological outcomes (i.e. cancer-specific and recurrence-free survival). The benefits of centralization on oncologic survival of radical cystectomy remain unclear given the varied definitions of HVHs and HVSs across studies. In fact, centralization of radical cystectomy could lead to an increase in patient load in HVHs and for HVSs, thereby leading to longer surgery waiting times, a factor that is important in the management of muscle-invasive bladder cancer. SUMMARY: The benefits of centralization of radical cystectomy with multidisciplinary management are shown increasingly and convincingly. More studies are necessary to prospectively test the benefits, risks and harms of centralization.
Authors: Łukasz Zapała; Aleksander Ślusarczyk; Bartłomiej Korczak; Paweł Kurzyna; Mikołaj Leki; Piotr Lipiński; Jerzy Miłow; Michał Niemczyk; Kamil Pocheć; Michał Późniak; Maciej Przudzik; Tomasz Suchojad; Rafał Wolański; Piotr Zapała; Tomasz Drewa; Marek Roslan; Waldemar Różański; Andrzej Wróbel; Piotr Radziszewski Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-01-26 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Frederik König; Benjamin Pradere; Nico C Grossmann; Fahad Quhal; Pawel Rajwa; Ekaterina Laukhtina; Keiichiro Mori; Satoshi Katayama; Takafumi Yanagisawa; Hadi Mostafai; Reza Sari Motlagh; Abdulmajeed Aydh; Roland Dahlem; Shahrokh F Shariat; Michael Rink Journal: Transl Cancer Res Date: 2022-04 Impact factor: 1.241
Authors: Satoshi Katayama; Keiichiro Mori; Benjamin Pradere; Hadi Mostafaei; Victor M Schuettfort; Fahad Quhal; Reza Sari Motlagh; Ekaterina Laukhtina; Marco Moschini; Nico C Grossmann; Yasutomo Nasu; Shahrokh F Shariat; Harun Fajkovic Journal: Int J Clin Oncol Date: 2021-06-19 Impact factor: 3.402