• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

保留肾单位手术或根治性肾输尿管切除术治疗上尿路尿路上皮癌患者的肿瘤学结局:一项基于人群的研究。

Oncologic outcomes of patients treated with kidney-sparing surgery or radical nephroureterectomy for upper urinary tract urothelial cancer: a population-based study.

作者信息

Ślusarczyk Aleksander, Zapała Piotr, Zapała Łukasz, Rajwa Paweł, Moschini Marco, Laukhtina Ekaterina, Radziszewski Piotr

机构信息

Department of General, Oncological and Functional Urology, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.

Department of General, Oncological and Functional Urology, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.

出版信息

Urol Oncol. 2024 Jan;42(1):22.e1-22.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2023.09.019. Epub 2023 Nov 18.

DOI:10.1016/j.urolonc.2023.09.019
PMID:37981503
Abstract

PURPOSE

Although kidney-sparing surgery (KSS) is a nonminor option for low-risk upper urinary tract urothelial cancer (UTUC), its oncological benefits in high-risk UTUC remain unclear when compared to radical nephroureterectomy (RNU). This study aimed to compare the oncological outcomes of RNU and KSS in patients with UTUC.

METHODS

We searched the SEER database for patients treated for primary non-metastatic UTUC with either RNU or a kidney-sparing approach (segmental ureterectomy (SU) or local tumor excision (LTE)) between 2004 and 2018.

RESULTS

The study included 6,659 patients with primary non-metastatic UTUC treated with surgery; 2,888 (43.4%) and 3,771 (56.6%) patients presented with ureteral and renal pelvicalyceal tumors, respectively. Finally, 5,479 (82.3%) patients underwent RNU, 799 (12.0%) were treated with SU, and 381 (5.7%) patients received LTE. For confounder control, propensity score matching (PSM) of patients treated with SU and RNU was performed to adjust for T stage, grade, age, gender, tumor size, and lymphadenectomy performance. PSM analysis included 694 patients treated with RNU and 694 individuals who underwent SU. In multivariable Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses, we found no difference in either CSS or OS between RNU and SU, even in the subgroup of high-grade and/or muscle-invasive UTUC including pT3-T4 tumors (all p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In this population-based study, SU provides equivalent CSS and OS compared to RNU, even in high-risk and locally advanced ureteral cancer. Due to the unavoidable risk of selection bias, further prospective studies are expected to overcome the limitations of this study and support the wider implementation of KSS.

摘要

目的

尽管保留肾手术(KSS)是低风险上尿路尿路上皮癌(UTUC)的一种重要选择,但与根治性肾输尿管切除术(RNU)相比,其在高风险UTUC中的肿瘤学益处仍不明确。本研究旨在比较UTUC患者中RNU和KSS的肿瘤学结局。

方法

我们在监测、流行病学和最终结果(SEER)数据库中搜索了2004年至2018年间接受原发性非转移性UTUC治疗的患者,这些患者接受了RNU或保留肾方法(节段性输尿管切除术(SU)或局部肿瘤切除术(LTE))。

结果

该研究纳入了6659例接受手术治疗的原发性非转移性UTUC患者;分别有2888例(43.4%)和3771例(56.6%)患者出现输尿管和肾盂肾盏肿瘤。最终,5479例(82.3%)患者接受了RNU,799例(12.0%)接受了SU治疗,381例(5.7%)患者接受了LTE。为了控制混杂因素,对接受SU和RNU治疗的患者进行倾向评分匹配(PSM),以调整T分期、分级、年龄、性别、肿瘤大小和淋巴结清扫情况。PSM分析包括694例接受RNU治疗的患者和694例接受SU治疗的患者。在多变量Cox回归和Kaplan-Meier分析中,我们发现RNU和SU之间在癌症特异性生存(CSS)或总生存(OS)方面没有差异,即使在包括pT3 - T4肿瘤的高级别和/或肌层浸润性UTUC亚组中也是如此(所有p>0.05)。

结论

在这项基于人群的研究中,即使在高风险和局部晚期输尿管癌中,SU与RNU相比也能提供相当 的CSS和OS。由于不可避免的选择偏倚风险,预计进一步 的前瞻性研究将克服本研究的局限性,并支持KSS更广泛的应用。

相似文献

1
Oncologic outcomes of patients treated with kidney-sparing surgery or radical nephroureterectomy for upper urinary tract urothelial cancer: a population-based study.保留肾单位手术或根治性肾输尿管切除术治疗上尿路尿路上皮癌患者的肿瘤学结局:一项基于人群的研究。
Urol Oncol. 2024 Jan;42(1):22.e1-22.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2023.09.019. Epub 2023 Nov 18.
2
Oncologic Outcomes of Kidney-sparing Surgery Versus Radical Nephroureterectomy for Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Systematic Review by the EAU Non-muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer Guidelines Panel.保留肾单位手术与根治性肾输尿管切除术治疗上尿路上皮癌的肿瘤学结局:EAU 非肌肉浸润性膀胱癌指南小组的系统评价。
Eur Urol. 2016 Dec;70(6):1052-1068. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.07.014. Epub 2016 Jul 28.
3
Kidney-Sparing Surgery Has Equivalent Oncological Outcomes to Radical Nephroureterectomy for Ureteral Urothelial Carcinoma.保肾手术与根治性肾输尿管切除术治疗输尿管尿路上皮癌的肿瘤学结局相当。
J Endourol. 2024 Sep;38(9):921-928. doi: 10.1089/end.2024.0061. Epub 2024 Jun 11.
4
Comparison of oncological outcomes after segmental ureterectomy or radical nephroureterectomy in urothelial carcinomas of the upper urinary tract: results from a large French multicentre study.比较上尿路尿路上皮癌行节段性输尿管切除术与根治性肾输尿管切除术的肿瘤学结局:一项来自法国大型多中心研究的结果。
BJU Int. 2012 Oct;110(8):1134-41. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.10960.x. Epub 2012 Mar 6.
5
Oncological Outcomes of Laparoscopic Nephroureterectomy Versus Open Radical Nephroureterectomy for Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: An European Association of Urology Guidelines Systematic Review.腹腔镜肾输尿管切除术与开放根治性肾输尿管切除术治疗上尿路尿路上皮癌的肿瘤学结局:欧洲泌尿外科学会指南系统评价。
Eur Urol Focus. 2019 Mar;5(2):205-223. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2017.10.003. Epub 2017 Nov 15.
6
Nephroureterectomy vs. segmental ureterectomy of clinically localized, high-grade, urothelial carcinoma of the ureter: Practice patterns and outcomes.肾输尿管切除术与节段性输尿管切除术治疗临床局限性、高级别、输尿管尿路上皮癌:实践模式和结果。
Urol Oncol. 2020 Nov;38(11):851.e1-851.e10. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.08.004. Epub 2020 Aug 26.
7
Endoscopic intervention versus radical nephroureterectomy for the management of localized upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.内镜介入与根治性肾输尿管切除术治疗局限性上尿路上皮癌的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。
World J Urol. 2024 May 14;42(1):318. doi: 10.1007/s00345-024-05032-y.
8
Robotic radical nephroureterectomy and segmental ureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a multi-institutional experience.机器人根治性肾输尿管切除术和节段性输尿管切除术治疗上尿路尿路上皮癌:多机构经验。
World J Urol. 2019 Nov;37(11):2303-2311. doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-02790-y. Epub 2019 May 6.
9
Segmental Ureterectomy is Acceptable for High-risk Ureteral Carcinoma Comparing to Radical Nephroureterectomy.与根治性肾输尿管切除术相比,节段性输尿管切除术对于高危输尿管癌是可接受的。
J Invest Surg. 2019 Dec;32(8):746-753. doi: 10.1080/08941939.2018.1457192. Epub 2018 Apr 25.
10
A systematic review and meta-analysis of oncological and renal function outcomes obtained after segmental ureterectomy versus radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma.对上尿路尿路上皮癌行节段性输尿管切除术与根治性肾输尿管切除术术后肿瘤学及肾功能结局的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016 Nov;42(11):1625-1635. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2016.08.008. Epub 2016 Aug 25.

引用本文的文献

1
Endoscopic ablation versus nephroureterectomy in localized low-grade upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a comparison in terms of cancer-specific and other-cause mortality.局部低级别上尿路尿路上皮癌的内镜下消融术与肾输尿管切除术:癌症特异性死亡率和其他原因死亡率的比较
World J Urol. 2025 Apr 22;43(1):241. doi: 10.1007/s00345-025-05626-0.
2
Kidney sparing surgery versus radical nephroureterectomy in upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a meta-analysis and systematic review.上尿路尿路上皮癌保留肾手术与根治性肾输尿管切除术的Meta分析和系统评价
Front Oncol. 2025 Apr 2;15:1448079. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2025.1448079. eCollection 2025.
3
Prognostic evaluation of segmental ureterectomy combined with chemotherapy in high-grade non-metastatic ureteral cancer: a study based on the SEER database.
基于 SEER 数据库的高级别非转移性输尿管癌节段性输尿管切除术联合化疗的预后评估研究。
Sci Rep. 2024 Oct 23;14(1):25090. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-77117-y.
4
Open versus Minimally Invasive Nephroureterectomy: Contemporary Analysis from a Wide National Population-Based Database.开放与微创肾输尿管切除术:来自广泛全国人群数据库的当代分析。
Ann Surg Oncol. 2024 Oct;31(10):7212-7219. doi: 10.1245/s10434-024-15565-6. Epub 2024 Jun 15.