The current role of pentafecta in the reporting of radical cystectomy outcomes: a scoping review.

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q4 ANDROLOGY Translational andrology and urology Pub Date : 2024-06-30 Epub Date: 2024-06-20 DOI:10.21037/tau-23-593
Osama Mahmoud, Mulham Al-Nader, Lukas Püllen, Stephan Tschirdewahn, Boris A Hadaschik
{"title":"The current role of pentafecta in the reporting of radical cystectomy outcomes: a scoping review.","authors":"Osama Mahmoud, Mulham Al-Nader, Lukas Püllen, Stephan Tschirdewahn, Boris A Hadaschik","doi":"10.21037/tau-23-593","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pentafecta has recently been validated for reporting radical cystectomy (RC) outcomes in open, laparoscopic and robotic series. We aim in this review to explore the current role of pentafecta in the reporting of RC outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive literature search was performed in the PubMed database to identify relevant articles. The pentafecta achievement (PA) was defined originally as negative soft tissue surgical margin (NSTSM), lymph node (LN) dissection (LND) with removal of ≥16 LNs, absence of 90-days grade ≥3 Clavien-Dindo (CD) complications, a time interval of less than 3 months between the last transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) with evidence of muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) and RC, and absence of local pelvic recurrence within 1 year. The definition was later modified and the last two criteria were replaced by absence of urinary diversion (UD) related complications and any clinical recurrence at one year.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve studies with 4,946 patients were enrolled in the present review. All the studies were retrospective except one recently published randomized study comparing open and robotic-assisted RC. Pentafecta was totally achieved in 34% and main causes of missing pentafecta were the number of resected LNs and 90-days major complications. Type of UD, increasing age, advanced tumor stage, and decreasing surgical experience were the factors most commonly associated with a lower likelihood of PA. A positive correlation was seen between PA and long-term oncological outcome and quality of life. The main limitations in the present studies are their retrospective nature, relatively small sample size, and short median follow-up, most of which was less than 3 years.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The new pentafecta definition provides a comprehensive tool for reporting RC outcomes by including measures of postoperative morbidity, functional outcomes and local cancer control. Pentafecta include standards that could be useful for improving surgical quality, surgical education and comparing different techniques. However, pentafecta is not yet suitable for perioperative risk stratification and patient counseling.</p>","PeriodicalId":23270,"journal":{"name":"Translational andrology and urology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11228677/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational andrology and urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/tau-23-593","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANDROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Pentafecta has recently been validated for reporting radical cystectomy (RC) outcomes in open, laparoscopic and robotic series. We aim in this review to explore the current role of pentafecta in the reporting of RC outcomes.

Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed in the PubMed database to identify relevant articles. The pentafecta achievement (PA) was defined originally as negative soft tissue surgical margin (NSTSM), lymph node (LN) dissection (LND) with removal of ≥16 LNs, absence of 90-days grade ≥3 Clavien-Dindo (CD) complications, a time interval of less than 3 months between the last transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) with evidence of muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) and RC, and absence of local pelvic recurrence within 1 year. The definition was later modified and the last two criteria were replaced by absence of urinary diversion (UD) related complications and any clinical recurrence at one year.

Results: Twelve studies with 4,946 patients were enrolled in the present review. All the studies were retrospective except one recently published randomized study comparing open and robotic-assisted RC. Pentafecta was totally achieved in 34% and main causes of missing pentafecta were the number of resected LNs and 90-days major complications. Type of UD, increasing age, advanced tumor stage, and decreasing surgical experience were the factors most commonly associated with a lower likelihood of PA. A positive correlation was seen between PA and long-term oncological outcome and quality of life. The main limitations in the present studies are their retrospective nature, relatively small sample size, and short median follow-up, most of which was less than 3 years.

Conclusions: The new pentafecta definition provides a comprehensive tool for reporting RC outcomes by including measures of postoperative morbidity, functional outcomes and local cancer control. Pentafecta include standards that could be useful for improving surgical quality, surgical education and comparing different techniques. However, pentafecta is not yet suitable for perioperative risk stratification and patient counseling.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
目前五肽在根治性膀胱切除术结果报告中的作用:范围综述。
背景:最近,Pentafecta在报告开腹、腹腔镜和机器人膀胱切除术(RC)结果方面得到了验证。我们在这篇综述中旨在探讨五项fecta目前在报告根治性膀胱切除术结果中的作用:方法:我们在 PubMed 数据库中进行了全面的文献检索,以确定相关文章。五坏死(PA)最初定义为软组织手术切缘阴性(NSTSM)、淋巴结(LN)清扫(LND)并切除≥16个LN、90天内无≥3级Clavien-Dindo(CD)并发症、最后一次经尿道膀胱肿瘤(TURBT)切除术(有肌浸润性膀胱癌(MIBC)证据)与 RC 之间的时间间隔少于 3 个月;1 年内无盆腔局部复发。后来对该定义进行了修改,将后两个标准改为一年内无尿路改道(UD)相关并发症和任何临床复发:本综述共纳入了 12 项研究,涉及 4946 名患者。除一项最近发表的随机研究比较了开放式和机器人辅助 RC 外,所有研究均为回顾性研究。34%的患者完全达到了五全切除,未达到五全切除的主要原因是切除的LN数量和90天后的主要并发症。UD类型、年龄增加、肿瘤晚期和手术经验减少是最常见的与PA可能性降低相关的因素。PA与长期肿瘤预后和生活质量呈正相关。本研究的主要局限性在于其回顾性、样本量相对较小以及中位随访时间较短,其中大部分随访时间少于3年:结论:新的五项完美定义提供了一个全面的工具来报告 RC 结果,其中包括术后发病率、功能性结果和局部癌症控制的衡量标准。五联症包括的标准可能有助于提高手术质量、外科教育和比较不同的技术。不过,pentafecta 尚不适合用于围手术期风险分层和患者咨询。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
5.00%
发文量
80
期刊介绍: ranslational Andrology and Urology (Print ISSN 2223-4683; Online ISSN 2223-4691; Transl Androl Urol; TAU) is an open access, peer-reviewed, bi-monthly journal (quarterly published from Mar.2012 - Dec. 2014). The main focus of the journal is to describe new findings in the field of translational research of Andrology and Urology, provides current and practical information on basic research and clinical investigations of Andrology and Urology. Specific areas of interest include, but not limited to, molecular study, pathology, biology and technical advances related to andrology and urology. Topics cover range from evaluation, prevention, diagnosis, therapy, prognosis, rehabilitation and future challenges to urology and andrology. Contributions pertinent to urology and andrology are also included from related fields such as public health, basic sciences, education, sociology, and nursing.
期刊最新文献
A comparative study of survival outcomes between partial and radical cystectomy in octogenarians with muscle-invasive bladder cancer. A global, propensity-score matched analysis of patients receiving inflatable penile prostheses and the risk of complications, infections, and re-interventions. A narrative review on synchronous concurrent versus delayed sequential surgery in the artificial urinary sphincter and penile prosthesis implantation. A new adjustable artificial urinary sphincter for male stress urinary incontinence (VictoTM): preliminary clinical results. A personal tribute to Dr. F. Brantley Scott and the artificial urinary sphincter.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1