Fang D, Seisen T, Yang K, Liu P, Fan X, Singla N, Xiong G, Zhang L, Li X, Zhou L
Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Centre, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing 100034, China.
Academic Department of Urology, Pitié Salpétrière Hospital, APHP, 47-83 Boulevard de l'Hôpital, Paris F-75013, France; UPMC University Paris 06, GRC5, ONCOTYPE-Uro, Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie, Paris F-75005, France.
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016 Nov;42(11):1625-1635. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2016.08.008. Epub 2016 Aug 25.
To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the comparative studies reporting oncological and renal function outcomes of segmental ureterectomy (SU) versus radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) for upper tract urothelial carcinomas (UTUC).
A literature search on Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane library was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines, and a meta-analysis was performed to assess cancer-specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), intravesical recurrence free survival (IVRFS) and surgery-related variations in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR).
A total of 11 retrospective studies with 3963 patients who underwent either SU (n = 983; 24.8%) or RNU (n = 2980; 75.2%) were included. Although patients treated with SU were more likely to be diagnosed with favorable pathological features, the meta-analysis of unadjusted data revealed no significant difference between both groups in terms of CSS (HR 0.90, p = 0.33) and OS (HR 0.98, p = 0.93). Accordingly, the meta-analysis of adjusted data confirmed equivalent CSS (HR = 0.90, p = 0.47) between SU and RNU. Similarly, no significant difference was found in terms of RFS (HR 1.06, p = 0.72) and IVRFS (HR 1.35, p = 0.39). However, a significant decreased risk of impaired renal function was observed after SU when compared to RNU (mean eGFR difference = 9.32 ml/1.73 m, p = 0.007).
Although adverse patient and tumor characteristics were not equally balanced between treatment arms, our systematic review and meta-analysis supports similar oncological outcomes between SU and RNU, with better preservation of renal function after SU. As such, SU should be preferably used as the first-line treatment for low-risk ureter tumors, while considered for selected cases of high-risk disease.
对比较节段性输尿管切除术(SU)与根治性肾输尿管切除术(RNU)治疗上尿路尿路上皮癌(UTUC)的肿瘤学和肾功能结局的对照研究进行系统评价和荟萃分析。
根据PRISMA指南在PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆进行文献检索,并进行荟萃分析以评估癌症特异性生存(CSS)、总生存(OS)、无复发生存(RFS)、膀胱内无复发生存(IVRFS)以及估计肾小球滤过率(eGFR)的手术相关变化。
共纳入11项回顾性研究,涉及3963例接受SU(n = 983;24.8%)或RNU(n = 2980;75.2%)的患者。尽管接受SU治疗的患者更有可能被诊断为具有良好的病理特征,但未调整数据的荟萃分析显示,两组在CSS(风险比[HR]0.90,p = 0.33)和OS(HR 0.98,p = 0.93)方面无显著差异。因此,调整后数据的荟萃分析证实SU和RNU之间的CSS相当(HR = 0.90,p = 0.47)。同样,在RFS(HR 1.06,p = 0.72)和IVRFS(HR 1.35,p = 0.39)方面未发现显著差异。然而,与RNU相比,SU后观察到肾功能受损风险显著降低(平均eGFR差异 = 9.32 ml/1.73 m²,p = 0.007)。
尽管各治疗组之间患者和肿瘤的不良特征分布不均衡,但我们的系统评价和荟萃分析支持SU和RNU之间具有相似的肿瘤学结局,且SU后肾功能保留更好。因此,SU应优先用作低风险输尿管肿瘤的一线治疗方法,而对于部分高风险疾病病例也可考虑使用。