Suppr超能文献

整块切除与常规切除原发性膀胱癌(eBLOC):一项前瞻性、多中心、开放标签、3 期随机对照临床试验。

En Bloc Versus Conventional Resection of Primary Bladder Tumor (eBLOC): A Prospective, Multicenter, Open-label, Phase 3 Randomized Controlled Trial.

机构信息

Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza, Torino School of Medicine, Turin, Italy.

出版信息

Eur Urol Oncol. 2023 Oct;6(5):508-515. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2023.07.010. Epub 2023 Aug 4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

En bloc transurethral resection of the bladder (eTURB) might improve the surgical management of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) in comparison to conventional TURB (cTURB).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether eTURB is superior to cTURB in resection of NMIBC and specimen retrieval.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a randomized, multicenter trial in patients with up to three cTa-T1 NMIBC tumors of 1-3 cm in size, who were enrolled from January 2019 to January 2022.

INTERVENTION

Participants were randomized 1:1 to undergo eTURB (n = 192) or cTURB (n = 192).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary outcome was the prevalence of detrusor muscle (DM) in the specimen retrieved. Secondary endpoints included bladder perforation, persistent disease at second-look TURB, positive lateral resection margin, positive deep resection margin, operation time, perforation rate, obturator reflex, conversion from eTURB to cTURB, recurrence-free survival, and disease recurrence at 3 mo.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

A total of 384 patients were randomized to undergo eTURB or cTURB. A total of 452 tumors were resected and analyzed for the primary outcome. eTURB was superior to cTURB in retrieval of DM (80.7% vs 71.1%; mixed-model p = 0.01). Bladder perforation (5.6% vs 12%; difference -6.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI] -12.2% to -0.6%) and obturator reflex (8.4% vs 16%; difference -7.6%; 95% CI -14.3% to -0.9%) were less frequent in the eTURB arm than in the cTURB arm. Operation time did not differ between the two techniques (26 min, interquartile range [IQR] 20-38 for eTURB vs 25 min, IQR 17-35 for cTURB; difference 1 min, 95% CI -25.9 to 4.99). Second-look TURB was performed in 24 patients in the eTURB arm and 34 in the cTURB arm, with no difference in the rate of residual papillary disease (pTa/pT1: 56% vs 55.9%; difference 0.1%, 95% CI -25.5% to 25.7%). At median follow-up of 13 mo (IQR 7-20), 18.4% of the patients in the eTURB arm and 16.7% in the cTURB arm had experienced bladder cancer recurrence (Cox hazard ratio 0.87, 95% CI 0.49-1.52; p = 0.6).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with clinical NMIBC with up to three tumors of 1-3 cm in size, tumor removal via eTURB resulted in a higher rate of DM in the pathologic specimen in comparison to cTURB. Moreover, eTURB was associated with lower frequency of obturator reflex and bladder perforation than cTURB was. While improving on the quality indicators for NMIBC, the long-term differential oncologic benefits of eTURB remain uncertain.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We compared two techniques for removal of bladder tumors and found that tumor removal in a single piece, called en bloc resection, provides a better-quality specimen for pathology analysis and fewer complications in comparison to the conventional method. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT03718754.

摘要

背景

与传统经尿道膀胱肿瘤切除术(cTURB)相比,整块经尿道膀胱切除术(eTURB)可能改善非肌层浸润性膀胱癌(NMIBC)的手术管理。

目的

评估 eTURB 是否优于 cTURB 在切除 NMIBC 和标本获取方面的效果。

设计、地点和参与者:这是一项随机、多中心试验,纳入了 2019 年 1 月至 2022 年 1 月期间患有最大 3 个大小为 1-3cm 的 cTa-T1 NMIBC 肿瘤的患者,他们被随机分为两组,一组接受 eTURB(n=192),另一组接受 cTURB(n=192)。

干预措施

参与者以 1:1 的比例随机接受 eTURB(n=192)或 cTURB(n=192)。

主要结局测量和统计分析

主要结局是标本中存在逼尿肌(DM)的流行率。次要终点包括膀胱穿孔、第二次 TURB 时持续性疾病、侧切缘阳性、深切缘阳性、手术时间、穿孔率、闭孔反射、从 eTURB 转为 cTURB、无复发生存率和 3 个月时疾病复发。

结果和局限性

共 384 名患者随机分为 eTURB 或 cTURB 组。共切除 452 个肿瘤,并对主要结局进行了分析。与 cTURB 相比,eTURB 在获取 DM 方面更优(80.7% vs 71.1%;混合模型 p=0.01)。与 cTURB 相比,eTURB 组膀胱穿孔(5.6% vs 12%;差值-6.4%;95%置信区间 [CI] -12.2%至-0.6%)和闭孔反射(8.4% vs 16%;差值-7.6%;95% CI -14.3%至-0.9%)的发生率较低。两种技术的手术时间无差异(eTURB 为 26 分钟,四分位间距 [IQR] 为 20-38,cTURB 为 25 分钟,IQR 为 17-35;差值 1 分钟,95% CI -25.9 至 4.99)。eTURB 组中有 24 名患者和 cTURB 组中有 34 名患者进行了第二次 TURB,残留乳头状疾病的发生率无差异(pTa/pT1:56% vs 55.9%;差值 0.1%,95% CI -25.5%至 25.7%)。在中位随访 13 个月(IQR 7-20)时,eTURB 组和 cTURB 组分别有 18.4%和 16.7%的患者发生膀胱癌复发(Cox 风险比 0.87,95% CI 0.49-1.52;p=0.6)。

结论

在患有最大 3 个大小为 1-3cm 的临床 NMIBC 肿瘤的患者中,与 cTURB 相比,通过 eTURB 切除肿瘤可使病理标本中 DM 的检出率更高。此外,与 cTURB 相比,eTURB 发生闭孔反射和膀胱穿孔的频率较低。虽然提高了 NMIBC 的质量指标,但 eTURB 的长期肿瘤学获益尚不确定。

患者概况

我们比较了两种肿瘤切除技术,发现与传统方法相比,整块切除肿瘤(称为整块切除术)可提供更好质量的标本进行病理分析,并可减少并发症。本试验在 ClinicalTrials.gov 注册,编号为 NCT03718754。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验