TY - JOUR
T1 - Oncologic outcomes of kidney sparing surgery versus radical nephroureterectomy for the elective treatment of clinically organ confined upper tract urothelial carcinoma of the distal ureter
AU - Seisen, Thomas
AU - Nison, Laurent
AU - Remzi, Mezut
AU - Klatte, Tobias
AU - Mathieu, Romain
AU - Lucca, Ilaria
AU - Bozzini, Grégory
AU - Capitanio, Umberto
AU - Novara, Giacomo
AU - Cussenot, Olivier
AU - Compérat, Eva
AU - Renard-Penna, Raphaële
AU - Peyronnet, Benoit
AU - Merseburger, Axel S.
AU - Fritsche, Hans Martin
AU - Hora, Milan
AU - Shariat, Shahrokh F.
AU - Colin, Pierre
AU - Rouprêt, Morgan
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.
Copyright:
Copyright 2018 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2016/5/1
Y1 - 2016/5/1
N2 - Purpose We compared the oncologic outcomes of radical nephroureterectomy, distal ureterectomy and endoscopic surgery for elective treatment of clinically organ confined upper tract urothelial carcinoma of the distal ureter. Materials and Methods From a multi-institutional collaborative database we identified 304 patients with unifocal, clinically organ confined urothelial carcinoma of the distal ureter and bilateral functional kidneys. Rates of overall, cancer specific, local recurrence-free and intravesical recurrence-free survival according to surgery type were compared using Kaplan-Meier statistics. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed to assess the adjusted outcomes of radical nephroureterectomy, distal ureterectomy and endoscopic surgery. Results Overall 128 (42.1%), 134 (44.1%) and 42 patients (13.8%) were treated with radical nephroureterectomy, distal ureterectomy and endoscopic surgery, respectively. Although rates of overall, cancer specific and intravesical recurrence-free survival were equivalent among the 3 surgical procedures, 5-year local recurrence-free survival was lower for endoscopic surgery (35.7%) than for nephroureterectomy (95.0%, p <0.001) or ureterectomy (85.5%, p = 0.01) with no significant difference between nephroureterectomy and distal ureterectomy. On multivariable analyses only endoscopic surgery was an independent predictor of decreased local recurrence-free survival compared to nephroureterectomy (HR 1.27, p = 0.001) or distal ureterectomy (HR 1.14, p = 0.01). Distal ureterectomy and endoscopic surgery did not significantly correlate to cancer specific or intravesical recurrence-free survival. However, when adjustment was made for ASA® (American Society of Anesthesiologists®) score, distal ureterectomy (HR 0.80, p = 0.01) and endoscopic surgery (HR 0.84, p = 0.02) were independent predictors of increased overall survival, although no significant difference was found between them. Conclusions Because of better oncologic outcomes, distal ureterectomy could be considered the elective first line treatment of clinically organ confined urothelial carcinoma of the distal ureter.
AB - Purpose We compared the oncologic outcomes of radical nephroureterectomy, distal ureterectomy and endoscopic surgery for elective treatment of clinically organ confined upper tract urothelial carcinoma of the distal ureter. Materials and Methods From a multi-institutional collaborative database we identified 304 patients with unifocal, clinically organ confined urothelial carcinoma of the distal ureter and bilateral functional kidneys. Rates of overall, cancer specific, local recurrence-free and intravesical recurrence-free survival according to surgery type were compared using Kaplan-Meier statistics. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed to assess the adjusted outcomes of radical nephroureterectomy, distal ureterectomy and endoscopic surgery. Results Overall 128 (42.1%), 134 (44.1%) and 42 patients (13.8%) were treated with radical nephroureterectomy, distal ureterectomy and endoscopic surgery, respectively. Although rates of overall, cancer specific and intravesical recurrence-free survival were equivalent among the 3 surgical procedures, 5-year local recurrence-free survival was lower for endoscopic surgery (35.7%) than for nephroureterectomy (95.0%, p <0.001) or ureterectomy (85.5%, p = 0.01) with no significant difference between nephroureterectomy and distal ureterectomy. On multivariable analyses only endoscopic surgery was an independent predictor of decreased local recurrence-free survival compared to nephroureterectomy (HR 1.27, p = 0.001) or distal ureterectomy (HR 1.14, p = 0.01). Distal ureterectomy and endoscopic surgery did not significantly correlate to cancer specific or intravesical recurrence-free survival. However, when adjustment was made for ASA® (American Society of Anesthesiologists®) score, distal ureterectomy (HR 0.80, p = 0.01) and endoscopic surgery (HR 0.84, p = 0.02) were independent predictors of increased overall survival, although no significant difference was found between them. Conclusions Because of better oncologic outcomes, distal ureterectomy could be considered the elective first line treatment of clinically organ confined urothelial carcinoma of the distal ureter.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84963705822&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.juro.2015.11.036
DO - 10.1016/j.juro.2015.11.036
M3 - Journal articles
C2 - 26612196
AN - SCOPUS:84963705822
SN - 0022-5347
VL - 195
SP - 1354
EP - 1361
JO - Journal of Urology
JF - Journal of Urology
IS - 5
ER -