Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, China.
Department of pathology, Ningbo Clinical Pathology Diagnosis Center, Ningbo City, Zhejiang Province, China.
Cancer Med. 2024 Jun;13(11):e7323. doi: 10.1002/cam4.7323.
En-Bloc transurethral resection of bladder tumor (ERBT) was clinically used to resect non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). However, discrepancies persist regarding the comparisons between ERBT and conventional transurethral resection of bladder tumor (cTURBT).
We conducted a comprehensive search in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and performed manual searches of reference lists to collect and extract data. Data evaluation was carried out using Review Manager 5.4.0, Rx64 4.1.3, and relevant packages.
There were nine eligible meta-analyses and nine eligible RCTs in our study. NMIBC patients undergoing ERBT were significant associated with a lower rate of bladder perforation and obturator nerve reflex compared to those receiving cTURBT. Our pooled result indicated that ERBT and cTURBT required similar operation time. Regarding postoperative outcomes, ERBT demonstrated superior performance compared to cTURBT in terms of detrusor muscle presence, catheterization time, and residual tumor. ERBT exhibited a higher rate of three-month recurrence-free survival (RFS) compared to those receiving cTURBT (p < 0.05; I = 0%). In bipolar subgroup, ERBT had a significant better 12-month RFS than cTURBT (p < 0.05; I = 0%). Simultaneously, the exclusion of Hybrid Knife data revealed a significant improvement in 12-month RFS associated with ERBT (p < 0.05; I = 50%).
Using a combination of umbrella review and meta-analysis, we demonstrated that ERBT had better or comparable perioperative outcome and improved 3 and 12 month RFS than cTURBT. We suggest that ERBT maybe a better surgical method for patients with NMIBC compared with cTURBT.
整块经尿道膀胱肿瘤切除术(ERBT)临床上用于切除非肌肉浸润性膀胱癌(NMIBC)。然而,在 ERBT 与传统经尿道膀胱肿瘤切除术(cTURBT)的比较方面仍存在差异。
我们在 PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、Cochrane 系统评价数据库以及参考文献列表中进行了全面检索,以收集和提取数据。使用 Review Manager 5.4.0、Rx64 4.1.3 和相关软件包进行数据评估。
本研究纳入了 9 项合格的荟萃分析和 9 项合格的 RCT。与接受 cTURBT 的患者相比,接受 ERBT 的 NMIBC 患者膀胱穿孔和闭孔神经反射的发生率显著降低。我们的汇总结果表明,ERBT 和 cTURBT 的手术时间相似。关于术后结果,与 cTURBT 相比,ERBT 在逼尿肌存在、导尿管时间和残留肿瘤方面表现更好。与接受 cTURBT 的患者相比,ERBT 的三个月无复发生存率(RFS)更高(p<0.05;I=0%)。在双极亚组中,ERBT 的 12 个月 RFS 显著优于 cTURBT(p<0.05;I=0%)。同时,排除 Hybrid Knife 数据后,ERBT 的 12 个月 RFS 显著提高(p<0.05;I=50%)。
通过伞式评价和荟萃分析相结合,我们表明 ERBT 在围手术期结果方面具有更好或相当的效果,并且改善了 3 个月和 12 个月的 RFS ,优于 cTURBT。我们建议,与 cTURBT 相比,ERBT 可能是治疗 NMIBC 患者的更好手术方法。