Literature DB >> 32869540

The impact of orthotopic neobladder vs ileal conduit urinary diversion after cystectomy on the survival outcomes in patients with bladder cancer: A propensity score matched analysis.

Xiaohong Su1, Kaihui Wu1, Shuo Wang1, Wei Su1, Chuanyin Li1, Bingkun Li1, Xiangming Mao1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Bladder cancer (BCa) is the most common urinary malignancy. The standard surgical treatment for patients with muscle-invasive BCa is cystectomy plus urinary diversion. Ileal conduit (IC) or orthotopic neobladder (ON), which have different indications, are the most commonly performed urinary diversions. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We sampled 5480 BCa patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database from 2004 to 2015. Kaplan-Meier method with the log-rank test was used to assess cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS). Univariate and multivariate Cox's proportional hazard model was conducted to evaluate the hazard ratio of cancer-specific mortality and all-cause mortality before and after propensity score matching (PSM).
RESULTS: We identified 5480 patients who received radical cystectomy (RC) plus IC (n = 5071) or ON (n = 409) with a median follow-up period of 33 months (interquartile range, 13-78 months). Patients in the ON group tended to be male and younger, with a higher percentage of married individuals, early pathological T stage, lymphadenectomy, and non-radiotherapy (all P < .05). After 1:1 PSM, 409 matched pairs were selected. Univariate and multivariate analysis showed that the ON group had better CSS and OS probabilities than the IC group in the overall cohort [hazard ratio (HR): 0.692, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.576-0.831, P < .001; HR: 0.677, 95% CI: 0.579-0.793, P < .001 respectively]. However, subgroup analysis revealed that only patients with pathological T2 stage benefited from ON diversion after PSM in the context of CSS (P = .016) and OS (P <.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Young, married, and male patients with early pathological T stage, especially T2 stage, were more suitable to receive RC plus ON surgery, which could improve their probability of survival.
© 2020 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  SEER; bladder cancer; ileal conduit; orthotopic neobladder; radical cystectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32869540      PMCID: PMC7571812          DOI: 10.1002/cam4.3404

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Med        ISSN: 2045-7634            Impact factor:   4.452


INTRODUCTION

Bladder cancer (BCa) is the most common malignancy in the urinary system and the 4th most commonly diagnosed cancer in males in the United States. According to the latest European Association of Urology guideline on muscle‐invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), radical cystectomy (RC) with urinary diversion is the standard treatment recommended for patients with MIBC T2‐T4a, N0‐Nx, M0, and selected patients with high‐risk nonmuscle‐invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). Urinary diversion is the second important step after RC. There are currently three alternative types of urinary diversion, including abdominal diversion, urethral diversion, and rectosigmoid diversion. Age, comorbidity, cardio‐pulmonary function, cognitive function, patient's social support, and preference are all important factors that should be considered when choosing the type of urinary diversion. Nowadays, the most commonly performed urinary diversions are ileal conduit (IC) or orthotopic neobladder (ON). , Previous studies have aimed to assess the impact of IC and ON diversions on the health‐related quality‐of‐life (HRQoL) of BCa patients. Although no significant differences in QoL were observed between continent and incontinent urinary diversion, ON was shown to provide a better body image and normal urethral voiding. In a multicenter study that included 2501 patients undergoing RC for BCa, regardless of the urinary diversion that was used, the actuarial 5‐year cancer‐specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were 67% and 47% respectively. Oncological outcomes after RC depend on specific variables, including tumor stage, lymph node yield and positivity, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), surgical margin status, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Nevertheless, Yossepowitch and his colleagues reported that ON diversion did not compromise the oncological outcomes of cystectomy, because no CSS or recurrence‐free survival (RFS) differences were identified between the ON (n = 214) and IC (n = 269) cohorts when stratified by pathological stage. To the best of our knowledge, there have been no randomized controlled trials or retrospective studies on a large population aimed at comparing the oncological outcomes between IC and ON diversion. Consequently, the aim of this study is to use data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, which represents 28% of the United States’ population, to compare the CSS and OS of patients with IC or ON diversion. Ultimately, the aim is to provide a relatively good level of evidence for urologists and patients to make the decision about which urinary diversion to use.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data source and study population

The study cases in this study were retrieved from 18 SEER cancer registries using SEER*STAT 8.3.6 software. Patients were included if they met the following criteria (n = 7531): (a) year of diagnosis between 2004 and 2015; (b) using the International Classification of Diseases for Oncology 3/WHO site recode: C67.0‐67.9 (urinary bladder); (c) using the surgery codes C61 and C64 (radical cystectomy plus IC or ON). The following exclusion criteria were also applied: (a) patients with a prior history of other malignancy (n = 2021); (b) unknown death status (n = 30) (Figure 1). A total of 5480 patients were included and their clinicopathological data were retrospectively analyzed.
FIGURE 1

Flow‐chart demonstrating the approach used to identify patients with bladder cancer registered in the SEER database from 2004 to 2015

Flow‐chart demonstrating the approach used to identify patients with bladder cancer registered in the SEER database from 2004 to 2015

Variables definition

Demographic characteristics included age at diagnosis, gender, marital status, and race. Tumor characteristics included tumor location, histology, TNM status, stage, grade, LVI, and lymphadenectomy. Treatment information included surgery approach, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy. Marital status was defined as married, unmarried, or unknown. Unmarried included never married, separated/divorced, and widowed patients. Race was categorized as white, black, Asian/Pacific Islander, and American Indian/Alaskan Native. Tumor location was defined as primary tumor located in the trigone, dome, lateral wall, anterior wall, posterior wall, bladder neck, ureteric orifice, urachus, overlapping lesions, and other locations not otherwise specified of the bladder. BCa histology was classified as transitional cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and other rare types. Pathological TNM status was assessed according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer, sixth edition. T stages were divided into subgroups as T0‐Tis‐Ta‐T1, T2, T3, T4, and Tx/NA for further analysis. Tumor grade was assigned according to the SEER database as grades I, II, III, IV, and unknown. According to the “RX Summ‐Scope Reg LN Sur (2003+)” column in the SEER database, lymphadenectomy included 1 to 3 removed regional lymph nodes, 4 or more removed regional lymph nodes, and unknown number of removed regional lymph nodes. Surgical approach was categorized as RC plus ID or ON according to the “RX Summ‐Surg Prim Site (1998+).”

Statistical analyses

SPSS version 23.0 (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY) was used for all statistical analyses and propensity score matching (PSM). Chi‐square test and Mann‐Whitney U tests were used to determine the significant differences between categorical and continuous variables and surgical approach. The CSS and OS curves were created by the Kaplan‐Meier method with the log‐rank test. To estimate the impact of IC or ON on prognosis, univariate and multivariate cox regression analysis were carried out, and the results were presented as hazards ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). A fewer number of patients were treated by ON than by IC diversion (409 vs 5071). Moreover, there were also imbalances in baseline characteristics, such as age, gender, marital status, T stage, lymphadenectomy and radiotherapy; therefore, PSM was used for more objective comparison. For PSM, patients receiving IC or ON were matched 1:1 with a caliper set at 0. The matching algorithm was nearest neighbor matching, and the estimation algorithm was logistic regression. The PSM was described and adjusted for different variables, including age, gender, sex, marital status, TNM stages, lymphadenectomy, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy. All reported P‐values were two‐tailed and a P < .050 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Comparison of baseline clinicopathological characteristics before and after PSM

A total of 5480 BCa patients who underwent RC plus IC (n = 5071) or ON (n = 409) were included (Table S1). There were no significant differences in terms of race, primary tumor site, histology, N stage, M stage, grade, and chemotherapy between the two different urinary diversions (all P > .050). However, patients in the ON group tended to be younger (median year: 63 vs 69, P < .001) and male (97.1% vs 86.9%, P < .001), with a higher percentage of married individuals (73.3% vs 64.1%, P < .001), early T stage (T0‐T2: 59.6% vs 49.3%, P < .001), lymphadenectomy (97.1% vs 91.3%, P < .001), and nonradiotherapy (98.5% vs 96.1%, P = .012) before PSM. After 1:1 PSM adjusting for age, gender, sex, marital status, TNM stages, lymphadenectomy, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy, there were no significant differences between the IC and ON groups (all P > .050, Table 1).
TABLE 1

Clinical and pathological characteristics of BCa patients between different urinary diversion after PSM

CharacteristicUrinary diversion, % of patientsChi‐square or Z P value
Ileal conduit (n = 409)Orthotopic neobladder (n = 409)
Age, median (IQR)63 (56‐69)63 (55‐69)−0.789.430
Gender0.440.507
Male97.897.1
Female2.22.9
Race7.585.108
White90.289.7
Black5.62.9
AI0.50.5
API3.46.6
Unknown0.20.2
Marital status3.743.154
Married73.173.3
No26.725.2
Unknown0.21.5
Primary tumor site11.331.254
Trigone of bladder6.83.9
Dome of bladder5.43.7
Lateral wall of bladder17.117.1
Anterior wall of bladder1.22.4
Posterior wall of bladder7.37.8
Bladder neck1.73.7
Ureteric orifice1.21.5
Urachus0.00.5
Overlapping lesion of bladder20.020.0
Bladder, NOS39.139.4
Histology1.580.454
Transitional cell carcinoma94.492.2
Squamous cell carcinoma2.02.7
Other types3.75.1
Pathological T stage0.168.997
T0‐Tis‐Ta‐T115.214.4
T244.745.2
T327.628.4
T411.511.0
Tx/NA1.01.0
Pathological N stage3.525.317
N081.279.0
N111.09.5
N26.610.0
N30.00.0
Nx/NA1.21.5
Pathological M stage4.328.115
M096.694.6
M12.04.4
Mx/NA1.51.0
Grade4.916.296
I0.70.7
II4.64.2
III26.934.0
IV63.157.2
Unknown4.63.9
Lymphadenectomy2.687.261
No2.72.7
Yes96.197.1
Others1.20.2
Adjuvant radiation2.020.155
No99.598.5
Yes0.51.5
Adjuvant chemotherapy0.127.721
No60.659.4
Yes39.440.6

Abbreviations: AI, American Indian/Alaskan Native; API, Asian/Pacific Islander; BCa, bladder cancer; IQR, interquartile range; NA, not available; NOS, not otherwise specified; PSM, propensity score matching.

Clinical and pathological characteristics of BCa patients between different urinary diversion after PSM Abbreviations: AI, American Indian/Alaskan Native; API, Asian/Pacific Islander; BCa, bladder cancer; IQR, interquartile range; NA, not available; NOS, not otherwise specified; PSM, propensity score matching.

Univariate and multivariate analyses of the predictors of cancer‐specific mortality and all other‐cause mortality before PSM

The median follow‐up period was 33 months (interquartile range: 33‐78 months), with a total of 3034 (59.8%) and 170 (41.6%) deaths in the IC and ON groups respectively. Among all of the deaths, 2178 (43%) and 127 (31.1%) patients died specifically from BCa in the IC and ON groups respectively. The 5‐year CSS and OS probabilities for the IC group and the ON group were 55%, 72.9%, and 45.1%, 66.0% respectively (Figure 2A and F, both P < .001). When stratified by T stages, patients with each T stage in the ON group also showed longer CSS and OS than those in the IC group (Figure 2B‐2E and G‐J).
FIGURE 2

Influence of the urinary diversion on Cancer‐Specific Survival (A‐E) and Overall Survival (F‐J) in Bladder Cancer patients stratified by pathological T stage before propensity score matching

Influence of the urinary diversion on Cancer‐Specific Survival (A‐E) and Overall Survival (F‐J) in Bladder Cancer patients stratified by pathological T stage before propensity score matching Before PSM, univariate analyses revealed that age, marital status, primary tumor site, histology, TNM stages, grade, lymphadenectomy, urinary diversion, and radiotherapy were all associated with cancer‐specific mortality (CSM) and all‐cause mortality (ACM) (Tables S2 and S3). After controlling for other factors, urinary diversion was an independent risk factor for CSM and ACM in the multivariate analyses [ON vs IC, HR: 0.692, 95% CI: 0.576‐0.831, P < .001; HR: 0.677, 95% CI: 0.579‐0.793, P < .001 respectively] (Tables S2 and S3).

Impact of IC vs ON on CSS and OS after PSM

After 1:1 PSM, cox regression analyses showed that ON was a protective factor for CSS and OS for all T stages by multivariate analysis (ON vs ID, HR: 0.741, 95% CI: 0.583‐0.941, P = .014; HR: 0.671, 95% CI: 0.548‐0.823, P < .001, respectively) (Table 2, Figure 3A and Table 3, Figure 3F respectively). However, when stratified by T stages, subgroup analysis revealed that only patients with pathological T2 stage obtained survival benefit from ON after PSM in terms of CSS (P = .016) and OS (P < .001) (Figure 3B‐3E and Figure 3G‐3J).
TABLE 2

Univariate and multivariate regression analyses for CSM after PSM

CharacteristicUnivariateMultivariate
HR95% CI P HR95% CI P
Age1.0151.002‐1.028.019* 1.0120.999‐0.025.073*
Gender
FemaleRef..040Ref..077
Male0.4970.255‐0.9680.5420.274‐1.069
Race
WhiteRef..499
Black1.0770.604‐1.922.801
AI0.7500.105‐5.344.774
API0.5460.281‐1.062.075
Unknown0.0010.001‐1.003.946
Marital status
MarriedRef..179
No1.2290.944‐1.601.125
Unknown0.3730.052‐2.662.325
Primary tumor site
Trigone of bladderRef..938
Dome of bladder0.7880.372‐1.668.533
Lateral wall of bladder0.8330.482‐1.439.512
Anterior wall of bladder0.3310.077‐1.427.138
Posterior wall of bladder0.9800.532‐1.806.949
Bladder neck0.5980.222‐1.610.309
Ureteric orifice0.9170.310‐2.710.875
Urachus0.0010.001‐1.002.948
Overlapping lesion of bladder0.8630.508‐1.468.588
Bladder, NOS0.8960.544‐1.475.666
Histology
Transitional cell carcinomaRef..005* Ref..077
Squamous cell carcinoma0.4150.133‐1.294.1300.4210.134‐1.326.139
Other types1.9561.227‐3.119.005* 1.5830.919‐2.727.098
Pathological T stage
T0‐Tis‐Ta‐T1Ref.<.001* Ref.<.001*
T21.7371.060‐2.847.028* 1.6180.986‐2.655.057
T34.0202.469‐6.545<.001* 3.0661.857‐5.062<.001*
T45.4423.199‐9.257<.001* 4.3152.510‐7.419<.001*
Tx/NA4.2031.430‐12.358.009* 2.9150.370‐22.986.310
Pathological N stage
N0Ref.<.001* Ref.<.001*
N12.8542.083‐3.910<.001* 1.9901.432‐2.765<.001*
N23.2992.351‐4.628<.001* 2.6151.843‐3.711<.001*
N3 (n = 0)
Nx/NA2.0670.850‐5.030.1091.4540.237‐8.905.686
Pathological M stage
M0Ref..012* Ref..673
M12.2571.317‐3.868.003* 1.0670.599‐1.903.826
Mx/NA1.2440.463‐3.340.6650.2700.014‐5.228.387
Grade
IRef..477
II0.6500.138‐3.059.585
III1.0640.262‐4.329.931
IV1.1900.295‐4.797.807
Unknown1.3110.296‐5.811.721
Lymphadenectomy
NoRef..906
Yes1.0300.486‐2.182.939
Others0.6640.082‐5.396.702
Urinary diversion
Ileal conduiltRef..042* Ref.014*
Orthotopic neobladder0.7810.616‐0.9910.7410.583‐0.941
Adjuvant radiation
NoRef..003* Ref..070
Yes3.8641.589‐9.3932.3890.932‐6.126
Adjuvant chemotherapy
NoRef..011* Ref..395
Yes1.3621.073‐1.7280.8900.681‐1.164

Abbreviations: AI, American Indian/Alaskan Native; API, Asian/Pacific Islander; CI, confidence interval; CSM, cancer‐specific mortality; HR, hazard ratio; NA, not available; NOS, not otherwise specified; PSM, propensity score matching; Ref., reference.

Statistically significant.

FIGURE 3

Influence of the urinary diversion on Cancer‐Specific Survival (A‐E) and Overall Survival (F‐J) in Bladder Cancer patients stratified by pathological T stage after propensity score matching

TABLE 3

Univariate and multivariate regression analyses for ACM after PSM

CharacteristicUnivariateMultivariate
HR95% CI P HR95% CI P
Age1.0251.014‐1.036<.001* 1.0211.010‐1.033<.001*
Gender
FemaleRef..041* Ref..054
Male0.5350.293‐0.9760.5510.300‐1.012
Race
WhiteRef..172
Black1.0070.610‐1.662.977
AI1.1270.281‐4.528.866
API0.4630.254‐0.844.012*
Unknown (n = 2)
Marital status
MarriedRef..032* Ref..100
No1.3151.055‐1.639.015* 1.2761.015‐1.605.037*
Unknown0.5360.133‐2.154.3790.7330.181‐2.958.662
Primary tumor site
Trigone of bladderRef..813
Dome of bladder0.804.470
Lateral wall of bladder0.780.269
Anterior wall of bladder0.416.101
Posterior wall of bladder0.741.257
Bladder neck0.540.145
Ureteric orifice0.597.334
Urachus (n = 2)
Overlapping lesion of bladder0.7260.470‐1.120.148
Bladder, NOS0.8090.541‐1.211.303
Histology
Transitional cell carcinomaRef..040* Ref..084
Squamous cell carcinoma0.3820.143‐1.023.0560.3810.141‐1.029.057
Other types1.4510.925‐2.277.1051.3310.796‐2.227.276
Pathological T stage
T0‐Tis‐Ta‐T1Ref.<.001* Ref.<.001*
T21.6561.123‐2.442.011* 1.5521.051‐2.292.027
T33.3072.243‐4.875<.001* 2.5841.732‐3.854<.001*
T44.5202.939‐6.951<.001* 3.7182.394‐5.774<.001*
Tx/NA2.6420.932‐7.487.0680.6470.135‐3.098.586
Pathological N stage
N0Ref.<.001* Ref.<.001*
N12.3071.739‐3.062<.001* 1.5771.171‐2.123.003*
N22.8852.144‐3.882<.001* 2.4011.768‐3.261<.001*
N3 (n = 0)
Nx/NA2.0070.947‐4.252.0693.2841.050‐10.270.041*
Pathological M stage
M0Ref..024* Ref..982
M11.9701.211‐3.206.006* 0.9750.571‐1.664.926
Mx/NA1.1270.466‐2.724.7910.8490.128‐5.644.866
Grade
IRef..511
II0.6150.204‐1.853.388
III0.7460.275‐2.023.564
IV0.8720.325‐2.343.786
Unknown0.8220.275‐2.459.726
Lymphadenectomy
NoRef..961
Yes0.9560.525‐1.743.884
Others0.8060.179‐3.639.780
Urinary diversion
Ileal conduitRef..001* Ref.<.001*
Orthotopic neobladder0.7050.576‐0.8620.6710.548‐0.823
Adjuvant radiation
NoRef..002* Ref..033*
Yes3.5231.567‐7.9192.5261.080‐5.908
Adjuvant chemotherapy
NoRef..098
Yes1.1870.969‐1.455

Abbreviations: ACM, all‐cause mortality; AI, American Indian/Alaskan Native; API, Asian/Pacific Islander; CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; NA, not available; NOS, not otherwise specified; PSM, propensity score matching; Ref., reference.

Statistically significant.

Univariate and multivariate regression analyses for CSM after PSM Abbreviations: AI, American Indian/Alaskan Native; API, Asian/Pacific Islander; CI, confidence interval; CSM, cancer‐specific mortality; HR, hazard ratio; NA, not available; NOS, not otherwise specified; PSM, propensity score matching; Ref., reference. Statistically significant. Influence of the urinary diversion on Cancer‐Specific Survival (A‐E) and Overall Survival (F‐J) in Bladder Cancer patients stratified by pathological T stage after propensity score matching Univariate and multivariate regression analyses for ACM after PSM Abbreviations: ACM, all‐cause mortality; AI, American Indian/Alaskan Native; API, Asian/Pacific Islander; CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; NA, not available; NOS, not otherwise specified; PSM, propensity score matching; Ref., reference. Statistically significant.

DISCUSSION

RC and urinary diversion are two important steps of the operation for BCa patients. There are different choices of urinary diversions after RC, including uretero‐cutaneostomy, IC, continent cutaneous urinary diversion, ureterocolonic diversion, and ON according to the patients’ preference, performance status, life expectancy, and oncological control. Among these urinary diversions, IC and ON are the most commonly utilized ones in the clinical practice. , As a continent diversion, ON offers many advantages and represents an excellent option for urinary diversion for appropriate cases. However, large studies based on the United States and European populations have demonstrated that the utilization of orthotopic diversion has decreased over time. , The reason for this phenomenon may be due to increased adoption of robotic radical cystectomy and increased utilization of intracorporeal urinary diversion. Intracorporeal ON is a difficult technique, and thus, is associated with a higher rate of high‐grade complications. , Complications due to urinary diversion can prolong the hospital stay, increase hospitalization expenses, and impact all‐other cause survival. Different kinds of complications related to urinary diversion after RC have been reported, but most are due to the use of the bowel for urinary diversion. Complications related to IC diversion include urinary tract infections, pyelonephritis, ureteroileal leakage and stenosis, and stomal problems. , In two studies with large populations, complications associated with ON included diurnal and nocturnal incontinence, ureterointestinal stenosis, metabolic disorders, and vitamin B12 deficiency. , One previous retrospective study revealed that there was no significant difference in the decline of estimated glomerular filtration rate between IC and ON in patients with preoperative chronic kidney disease. In this study, we focus on the impact of IC and ON diversion on the oncological outcomes of BCa patients. Our aim is to provide some decision‐making guidance to urologists and patients regarding urinary diversion. Consistent with a previous study, this study showed that the ON cohort comprised younger and male patients and with a significantly higher percentage of early T stages compared to the IC cohort. Age alone is not a criterion for choosing continent ON diversion, but age >80 years is often considered to be the threshold. However, the optimal cut‐off value for age is still disputed. In our opinion, younger patients with BCa would have longer life expectancy, better tolerance for a complicated orthotopic diversion technique, and easier recovery from postoperational complications. A higher male‐to‐female ratio has also been observed among patients undergoing ON substitution in some large series from experience centers. , Male BCa patients are more suitable to receive ON substitution after RC due to the following reasons: (a) the incidence rate of BCa is higher in men than in women (male to female ratio 3:1) ; (b) the urethra of men is longer than that of women, which would, to some extent, ensure urinary continence after ON substitution. Frozen sections of pelvic lymph nodes and surgical margins have to be performed during the operation if ON diversion is planned. Positive surgical margins, N2 or N3 disease would exclude orthotopic neobladder reconstruction, , which may be the potential reason why early T stages are found in the ON group. There have been many studies on the impact of ON and IC diversions on the HRQoL of BCa patients, but the influence of ON diversion on cancer control has not been adequately studied. One systemic review, which included 29 studies, found no significant differences in QoL after radical cystectomy between continent and incontinent urinary diversion. However, by maintaining body image and normal urethral voiding in suitable patients, ON could offer a better QoL. In a relatively large study with 214 ON and 269 IC patients, Yossepowitch and his colleagues demonstrated that ON diversion had a more favorable CSS and OS compared to IC diversion (P = .04 and P = .001, respectively). However, in the subgroup analysis this statistical significance disappeared when further stratified into organ confined and nonorgan confined diseases. This was the only study on the impact of ON and IC diversions on oncological outcomes that we could find. In contrast with the above study, this study found better 5‐year CSS and 5‐year OS in the ON group for either all T stages together or T stage subgroups. Furthermore, given the discrepancies between the two groups, we performed 1:1 PSM to adjust for age, gender, sex, marital status, TNM stages, lymphadenectomy, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy. After PSM, multiple cox regression analyses showed that ON was a protective factor for CSS and OS for all T stages. However, when stratified for pathological T stages, subgroup analysis revealed that only patients with pathological T2 stage obtained CSS (P = .016) and OS (P < .001) benefit from ON diversion. This study has some limitations as well as some strengths. Among limitations, first, the study was of a retrospective nature, which means that the significant survival outcomes could be the effect of strict selection criteria for ON diversion. As a consequence, a randomized controlled trial to compare the long‐term oncological outcomes between ON diversion and IC diversion is important and urgent. Second, the documentation on lymphadenectomy was not very precise about the scope of lymph node dissection, which may have had an impact on survival outcomes. Third, there was no documentation on BCa recurrence in the SEER database; thus, we could not analyze recurrence‐free survival. Moreover, we did not control for performance status or any prognostic risk score at baseline. Consequently, as patients who have better performance status may be eligible for ON vs IC, this may result in selection bias. Nonetheless, to the best of our knowledge, the strength of this study is that it is the largest one to compare survival outcomes between the two groups based on the SEER cancer registries, which cover approximately 28% of the population of the United States. Most clinical trials have excluded patients who had a history of other prior malignancy, since this may have an impact on survival outcomes. , Based on this, and to ensure the reliability of our results, we also excluded patients with previous tumor history. Finally, the PSM method also increased the accuracy of this study.

CONCLUSIONS

As a continent diversion, ON diversion showed some advantages in terms of survival outcomes compared to IC diversion. Young, married, and male patients with early pathological T stage, especially T2 stage, were more suitable to receive RC plus ON surgery, which could improve their probability of survival.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Xiaohong Su: Data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, project administration, writing‐original draft. Kaihui Wu, Shuo wang and Wei Su: Data curation, formal analysis, investigation. Bingkun Li and Chuanyin Li: Data curation, formal analysis, investigation. Xiangming Mao: Conceptualization, project administration, supervision, and writing‐review and editing. TableS1‐S3 Click here for additional data file.
  21 in total

1.  Effect of prior cancer on outcomes in advanced lung cancer: implications for clinical trial eligibility and accrual.

Authors:  Andrew L Laccetti; Sandi L Pruitt; Lei Xuan; Ethan A Halm; David E Gerber
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2015-02-09       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Urinary diversions after cystectomy: the association of clinical factors, complications and functional results of four different diversions.

Authors:  Jakko A Nieuwenhuijzen; Remco R de Vries; Alex Bex; Henk G van der Poel; Wim Meinhardt; Ninja Antonini; Simon Horenblas
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2007-09-18       Impact factor: 20.096

3.  Radical cystectomy for urothelial carcinoma of the bladder without neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy: long-term results in 1100 patients.

Authors:  Richard E Hautmann; Robert C de Petriconi; Christina Pfeiffer; Bjoern G Volkmer
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2012-02-22       Impact factor: 20.096

4.  Orthotopic urinary diversion after cystectomy for bladder cancer: implications for cancer control and patterns of disease recurrence.

Authors:  Ofer Yossepowitch; Guido Dalbagni; Dragan Golijanin; S Machele Donat; Bernard H Bochner; Harry W Herr; William R Fair; Paul Russo
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  Long-term results of standard procedures in urology: the ileal neobladder.

Authors:  Richard E Hautmann; Bjoern G Volkmer; Martin C Schumacher; Juergen E Gschwend; Urs E Studer
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2006-07-08       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  Trends in urinary diversion after radical cystectomy for urothelial carcinoma.

Authors:  Kinan Bachour; Izak Faiena; Amirali Salmasi; Andrew T Lenis; David C Johnson; Aydin Pooli; Alexandra Drakaki; Allan J Pantuck; Karim Chamie
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-01-03       Impact factor: 4.226

7.  Results with radical cystectomy for treating bladder cancer: a 'reference standard' for high-grade, invasive bladder cancer.

Authors:  J P Stein; D G Skinner
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 5.588

8.  Development and Validation of an Improved Pathological Nodal Staging System for Urothelial Carcinoma of the Bladder.

Authors:  Devin N Patel; Michael Luu; Zachary S Zumsteg; Timothy J Daskivich
Journal:  Eur Urol Oncol       Date:  2019-01-31

Review 9.  European Association of Urology Guidelines on Muscle-invasive and Metastatic Bladder Cancer: Summary of the 2020 Guidelines.

Authors:  J Alfred Witjes; Harman Max Bruins; Richard Cathomas; Eva M Compérat; Nigel C Cowan; Georgios Gakis; Virginia Hernández; Estefania Linares Espinós; Anja Lorch; Yann Neuzillet; Mathieu Rouanne; George N Thalmann; Erik Veskimäe; Maria J Ribal; Antoine G van der Heijden
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2020-04-29       Impact factor: 20.096

10.  The impact of orthotopic neobladder vs ileal conduit urinary diversion after cystectomy on the survival outcomes in patients with bladder cancer: A propensity score matched analysis.

Authors:  Xiaohong Su; Kaihui Wu; Shuo Wang; Wei Su; Chuanyin Li; Bingkun Li; Xiangming Mao
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2020-09-01       Impact factor: 4.452

View more
  4 in total

1.  NBCA-Lipiodol Mixture Embolization of Persistent Urine Leakage After Orthotopic Neobladder Formation: Techniques and Outcomes.

Authors:  Jang Hee Han; Hyeong Dong Yuk; Jin Woo Choi; Ja Hyeon Ku
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-04-27

2.  Comparison of Health-Related Quality of Life Between Ileal Conduit Diversion and Orthotopic Neobladder in Women: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Wenzhou Xing; Sheng Zeng; Zhaoliang Xu; Shaoqiang Xing; Qian Liu
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-03-28       Impact factor: 6.244

3.  Preoperative Nutritional Risk Assessment for Predicting Complications after Radical Cystectomy plus Urinary Diversion for Bladder Cancer.

Authors:  Xing Wei; Jia Wang; Haitao Liu; Weizhe Fan; Gang Guo
Journal:  Emerg Med Int       Date:  2022-08-16       Impact factor: 1.621

4.  The impact of orthotopic neobladder vs ileal conduit urinary diversion after cystectomy on the survival outcomes in patients with bladder cancer: A propensity score matched analysis.

Authors:  Xiaohong Su; Kaihui Wu; Shuo Wang; Wei Su; Chuanyin Li; Bingkun Li; Xiangming Mao
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2020-09-01       Impact factor: 4.452

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.