Long-term survival after female pelvic organ-sparing radical cystectomy versus standard radical cystectomy: a multi-institutional propensity score-matched analysis

Author:

Zhong Wenlong1,Xia Kun12,Liu Libo1,Cheng Sida3,Hong Peng4,He Wang1,Dong Wen1,Liu Hao1,Lai Yiming1,Hao Han3,Liu Cheng4,Zhang Hongxian4,Li Xinfei3,Ding Guangpu3,Li Xuesong3,Ma Lulin4,Zhou Liqun3,Lin Tianxin1,Huang Jian1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital; Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Malignant Tumor Epigenetics and Gene Regulation; Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Urological Diseases, Sun Yat-sen (Zhongshan) University, Guangzhou, PR China

2. Department of Urology, Jiangxi provincial People’s Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang Medical College, Nanchang, PR China

3. Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, PR China

4. Department of Urology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, PR China

Abstract

Background: The application of pelvic organ preserving-radical cystectomy (POPRC) in female patients with bladder cancer has attracted more and more attention in recent years. In the current study, the authors aim to compare the long-term oncological outcomes of POPRC versus standard radical cystectomy (SRC) in a large multicenter retrospective cohort. Patients and methods: Data on female patients with bladder cancer who underwent POPRC or SRC in January 2006 and April 2018 were included from three Chinese urological centers. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were cancer-specific survival and recurrence-free survival. To decrease the effect of unmeasured confounders associated with treatment selection, 1:1 propensity score matching was performed. Results: Among the 273 enrolled patients, 158 underwent POPRC (57.9%), and 115 underwent SRC (42.1%). The median follow-up time was 38.6 (15.9–62.5) months. After propensity score matching, each cohort included 99 matched patients. The OS (P=0.940), cancer-specific survival (P=0.957), and recurrence-free survival (P=0.476) did not differ significantly from the two matched cohorts. Subgroup analysis confirmed that the OS was similar between the patients treated with POPRC and SRC across all subgroups examined (all P > 0.05). In multivariable analysis, the surgical method (SRC vs. POPRC) was not an independent risk factor for OS (Hazard ratio 0.874, 95% CI 0.592–1.290; P=0.498). Conclusions: The results showed that no significant difference in long-term survival was determined between female patients undergoing SRC and those undergoing POPRC.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

General Medicine,Surgery

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3