Consistencies in Follow-up After Radical Cystectomy for Bladder Cancer: A Framework Based on Expert Practices Collaboratively Developed by the European Association of Urology Bladder Cancer Guideline Panels.
Laura S Mertens, Harman Maxim Bruins, Roberto Contieri, Marek Babjuk, Bhavan P Rai, Albert Carrión Puig, Jose Luis Dominguez Escrig, Paolo Gontero, Antoine G van der Heijden, Fredrik Liedberg, Alberto Martini, Alexandra Masson-Lecomte, Richard P Meijer, Hugh Mostafid, Yann Neuzillet, Benjamin Pradere, John Redlef, Bas W G van Rhijn, Matthieu Rouanne, Morgan Rouprêt, Sæbjørn Sæbjørnsen, Thomas Seisen, Shahrokh F Shariat, Francesco Soria, Viktor Soukup, George Thalmann, Evanguelos Xylinas, Paramananthan Mariappan, J Alfred Witjes
{"title":"Consistencies in Follow-up After Radical Cystectomy for Bladder Cancer: A Framework Based on Expert Practices Collaboratively Developed by the European Association of Urology Bladder Cancer Guideline Panels.","authors":"Laura S Mertens, Harman Maxim Bruins, Roberto Contieri, Marek Babjuk, Bhavan P Rai, Albert Carrión Puig, Jose Luis Dominguez Escrig, Paolo Gontero, Antoine G van der Heijden, Fredrik Liedberg, Alberto Martini, Alexandra Masson-Lecomte, Richard P Meijer, Hugh Mostafid, Yann Neuzillet, Benjamin Pradere, John Redlef, Bas W G van Rhijn, Matthieu Rouanne, Morgan Rouprêt, Sæbjørn Sæbjørnsen, Thomas Seisen, Shahrokh F Shariat, Francesco Soria, Viktor Soukup, George Thalmann, Evanguelos Xylinas, Paramananthan Mariappan, J Alfred Witjes","doi":"10.1016/j.euo.2024.05.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>There is no standardized regimen for follow-up after radical cystectomy (RC) for bladder cancer (BC). To address this gap, we conducted a multicenter study involving urologist members from the European Association of Urology (EAU) bladder cancer guideline panels. Our objective was to identify consistent post-RC follow-up strategies and develop a practice-based framework based on expert opinion.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We surveyed 27 urologist members of the EAU guideline panels for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer and muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer using a pre-tested questionnaire with dichotomous responses. The survey inquired about follow-up strategies after RC and the use of risk-adapted strategies. Consistency was defined as >75% affirmative responses for follow-up practices commencing 3 mo after RC. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis.</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>We received responses from 96% of the panel members, who provided data from 21 European hospitals. Risk-adapted follow-up is used in 53% of hospitals, with uniform criteria for high-risk (at least ≥pT3 or pN+) and low-risk ([y]pT0/a/1N0) cases. In the absence of agreement for risk-based follow up, a non-risk-adapted framework for follow-up was developed. Higher conformity was observed within the initial 3 yr, followed by a decline in subsequent follow-up. Follow-up was most frequent during the first year, including patient assessments, physical examinations, and laboratory tests. Computed tomography of the chest and abdomen/pelvis was the most common imaging modality, initially at least biannually, and then annually from years 2 to 5. There was a lack of consistency for continuing follow-up beyond 10 yr after RC.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical implications: </strong>This practice-based post-RC follow-up framework developed by EAU bladder cancer experts may serve as a valuable guide for urologists in the absence of prospective randomized studies.</p><p><strong>Patient summary: </strong>We asked urologists from the EAU bladder cancer guideline panels about their patient follow-up after surgical removal of the bladder for bladder cancer. We found that although urologists have varying approaches, there are also common follow-up practices across the panel. We created a practical follow-up framework that could be useful for urologists in their day-to-day practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":12256,"journal":{"name":"European urology oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2024.05.010","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and objective: There is no standardized regimen for follow-up after radical cystectomy (RC) for bladder cancer (BC). To address this gap, we conducted a multicenter study involving urologist members from the European Association of Urology (EAU) bladder cancer guideline panels. Our objective was to identify consistent post-RC follow-up strategies and develop a practice-based framework based on expert opinion.
Methods: We surveyed 27 urologist members of the EAU guideline panels for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer and muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer using a pre-tested questionnaire with dichotomous responses. The survey inquired about follow-up strategies after RC and the use of risk-adapted strategies. Consistency was defined as >75% affirmative responses for follow-up practices commencing 3 mo after RC. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis.
Key findings and limitations: We received responses from 96% of the panel members, who provided data from 21 European hospitals. Risk-adapted follow-up is used in 53% of hospitals, with uniform criteria for high-risk (at least ≥pT3 or pN+) and low-risk ([y]pT0/a/1N0) cases. In the absence of agreement for risk-based follow up, a non-risk-adapted framework for follow-up was developed. Higher conformity was observed within the initial 3 yr, followed by a decline in subsequent follow-up. Follow-up was most frequent during the first year, including patient assessments, physical examinations, and laboratory tests. Computed tomography of the chest and abdomen/pelvis was the most common imaging modality, initially at least biannually, and then annually from years 2 to 5. There was a lack of consistency for continuing follow-up beyond 10 yr after RC.
Conclusions and clinical implications: This practice-based post-RC follow-up framework developed by EAU bladder cancer experts may serve as a valuable guide for urologists in the absence of prospective randomized studies.
Patient summary: We asked urologists from the EAU bladder cancer guideline panels about their patient follow-up after surgical removal of the bladder for bladder cancer. We found that although urologists have varying approaches, there are also common follow-up practices across the panel. We created a practical follow-up framework that could be useful for urologists in their day-to-day practice.
期刊介绍:
Journal Name: European Urology Oncology
Affiliation: Official Journal of the European Association of Urology
Focus:
First official publication of the EAU fully devoted to the study of genitourinary malignancies
Aims to deliver high-quality research
Content:
Includes original articles, opinion piece editorials, and invited reviews
Covers clinical, basic, and translational research
Publication Frequency: Six times a year in electronic format