Main Line Health, Department of Urology, Wynnewood, PA.
Main Line Health, Department of Urology, Wynnewood, PA.
Urol Oncol. 2020 Nov;38(11):851.e1-851.e10. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.08.004. Epub 2020 Aug 26.
Nephroureterectomy (NU) remains the gold-standard for upper-tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). However, nephron-sparing management (NSM), specifically segmental ureterectomy (SU) for urothelial tumors distal to the renal pelvis may offer decreased risk of renal insufficiency and equivalent cancer control.
To identify patient-specific and facility-related factors that are associated with the selection of SU vs. NU for patients with clinically localized, high-grade, ureteral UTUC.
DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: We searched the National Cancer Database between 2004 and 2015 for patients with high-grade, clinically localized, primary ureteral UTUC managed by either NU or SU.
Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed to assess patient, disease-specific, facility and treatment-related factors associated with SU vs. NU. Since surgical approach was only indexed after 2010, separate multivariable logistic regressions were performed including and excluding surgical approach in order to capture patients treated between 2004 and 2009. Survival analysis utilized Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional hazards regression.
Multivariate analysis including surgical approach demonstrated that among other factors, higher clinical stage (P = 0.034), larger tumor size (P < 0.001), the addition of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (P = 0.002), and the utilization of minimally invasive surgery (P < 0.05) decreased the likelihood of patients receiving SU. In this same cohort, institutions with larger facility volumes (P = 0.038) and performing intraoperative lymph node dissection (P < 0.001) were associated with a higher probability of SU. Excluding surgical approach, once again more advanced clinical stage (P = 0.005), larger tumor size (P < 0.001), and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (P = 0.003) decreased the probability of patients receiving SU, while increasing age (P = 0.049) and intraoperative lymph node dissection (P < 0.001) were more closely associated with SU compared to NU. No differences were noted in pathological T stage (P > 0.05), 30-day readmission (P = 0.7), 30-day mortality (P = 0.09), and 90-day mortality (P = 0.157) on multivariate analysis between SU and NU. Additionally, no significant differences were seen in median overall survival between patients receiving SU or NU (53 vs. 50 months; P = 0.143).
Comparable outcomes suggest segmental ureterectomy for high-grade ureteral UTUC is appropriate in well-selected patients. Practice patterns appear consistent with guideline recommendations (decreased tumor size and lower clinical stage favor SU), but treatment disparities may exist based on a multitude of patient, pathologic- and facility-related factors. Improved dissemination of knowledge regarding practice patterns and outcomes of SU for UTUC of the ureter has the potential to improve delivery of NSM in appropriate patients.
In this study, we examined factors associated with different surgical procedures for cancer of the ureter. We found that smaller tumor sizes, a less advanced clinical stage, intraoperative lymph dissection higher facility volumes tended to favor kidney-sparing treatment, while survival outcomes appear comparable to renal extirpation.
肾输尿管切除术(NU)仍然是上尿路尿路上皮癌(UTUC)的金标准。然而,保肾治疗(NSM),特别是肾盂以下的输尿管节段切除术(SU),可能会降低肾功能不全的风险,并获得与癌症控制相当的效果。
确定与临床局限性高分级输尿管 UTUC 患者选择 SU 与 NU 相关的患者特异性和医疗机构相关因素。
设计、设置、参与者:我们在 2004 年至 2015 年间在国家癌症数据库中搜索了接受 NU 或 SU 治疗的高分级、临床局限性、原发性输尿管 UTUC 患者。
采用单变量和多变量分析评估与 SU 与 NU 相关的患者、疾病特异性、医疗机构和治疗相关因素。由于手术方法仅在 2010 年后进行索引,因此分别进行了多变量逻辑回归,包括和不包括手术方法,以捕捉在 2004 年至 2009 年期间接受治疗的患者。生存分析采用 Kaplan-Meier 方法和 Cox 比例风险回归。
包括手术方法的多变量分析表明,在其他因素中,较高的临床分期(P=0.034)、较大的肿瘤大小(P<0.001)、新辅助化疗的添加(P=0.002)和微创手术的使用(P<0.05)降低了患者接受 SU 的可能性。在同一队列中,医疗机构的较大容量(P=0.038)和进行术中淋巴结清扫(P<0.001)与更高的 SU 可能性相关。再次排除手术方法,较高级别的临床分期(P=0.005)、更大的肿瘤大小(P<0.001)和新辅助化疗(P=0.003)再次降低了患者接受 SU 的可能性,而年龄较大(P=0.049)和术中淋巴结清扫(P<0.001)与 SU 相比,与 NU 更密切相关。在多变量分析中,SU 和 NU 之间在病理 T 分期(P>0.05)、30 天再入院(P=0.7)、30 天死亡率(P=0.09)和 90 天死亡率(P=0.157)方面无显著差异。此外,接受 SU 或 NU 的患者的中位总生存期之间无显著差异(53 与 50 个月;P=0.143)。
相似的结果表明,在精心选择的患者中,对高级别输尿管 UTUC 进行节段性输尿管切除术是合适的。实践模式似乎符合指南建议(肿瘤大小减小和临床分期降低有利于 SU),但基于众多患者、病理和医疗机构相关因素,可能存在治疗差异。提高对 SU 治疗输尿管 UTUC 的实践模式和结果的认识,有可能改善在适当患者中实施 NSM。
在这项研究中,我们研究了与不同手术程序相关的因素。我们发现,肿瘤较小、临床分期较低、术中淋巴结清扫、医疗机构容量较高,这些因素倾向于支持保留肾脏的治疗,而生存结果似乎与肾脏切除相当。