Cuaj-Canadian Urological Association Journal最新文献

Introduction: Elective pelvic nodal irradiation for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) undergoing trimodal therapy (TMT ) is controversial. In patients with node-negative (N0) MIBC, the benefit of elective whole-pelvis concurrent chemoradiation (WP-CCR) compared to bladder-only (BO )-CCR has not been demonstrated. Using real-world data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB ), we sought to compare the overall survival (OS ) between BO-CCR and WP-CCR for MIBC.

Methods: Using the 2020 NCDB Participant User File, we identified cases of MIBC diagnosed between 2017 and 2019. We selected patients with clinical T2-T4aN0M0 disease receiving CCR as first-line treatment. CCR was defined as transurethral resection of bladder tumor followed by ≥40 Gy radiation to the bladder with concurrent single- or multiple-agent chemotherapy. Based on elective nodal irradiation status, patients were stratified as having received BO-CCR vs. WP-CCR. OS analysis was performed using summary three-month conditional landmark, inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW)-adjusted Kaplan-Meier estimates, and Cox regression.

Results: A total of 604 patients receiving CCR for MIBC were identified: 367 (60.8%) BO-CCR and 237 (39.2%) WP-CCR. Before IPTW, the groups were imbalanced in terms of baseline characteristics. The median followup of the weighted population was 42.3 months (interquartile range 18.1-49.1 months). In IPTW-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, WP-CCR was associated with a significant OS benefit compared to BO-CCR (adjusted hazard ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.54-0.96, p=0.026).

Conclusions: In the setting of CCR for N0 MIBC, this retrospective NCDB analysis revealed that WP-CCR was associated with a benefit in OS compared to BO-CCR.

Introduction: This research evaluates the utility and precision of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in urology, inspired by recent affirmations of its feasibility and value.1,2 Our study provides valuable insights for urologists about POCUS's practical usage.

Methods: A prospective study assessed POCUS usage and accuracy in the University of Alberta's Division of Urology using data from April 4, 2022, to April 4, 2023. Data include POCUS indications, findings, and correlation with the final diagnosis/gold standard. Additionally, a qualitative survey was conducted among urologists and residents about POCUS's pros, cons, and barriers to integration.

Results: Thirty-three patients underwent POCUS examinations, mainly for suspected hydronephrosis (27%, n=9). Other indications included urinary retention, testicular mass, torsion, cryptorchidism, renal mass, extended focused assessment with sonography in trauma (eFAST ) exams, nephrostomy tube placement confirmation, and scrotal hematomas. POCUS findings matched the final diagnosis in most cases, showing 86% sensitivity, with an average exam time of 1-5 minutes. POCUS showed potential for suprapubic tube insertions. Residents (60%, n=20) were the most frequent users, followed by staff (33%, n=10), and students (6%, n=2). The surveyed urologists and residents expressed comfort with POCUS but cited time, cost, and practicality as barriers.

Conclusions: POCUS proves accurate and beneficial in urology, particularly for hydronephrosis. Most findings align with the gold standard, and the average exam time is brief. Barriers include time and cost. Further research is necessary to evaluate cost-effectiveness and POCUS's impact on patient outcomes in routine urologic practice.

Introduction: Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) failure occurs in approximately 40% of patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) within two years. We describe our institutional experience with sequential intravesical gemcitabine and docetaxel (gem/doce) as salvage therapy post-BCG failure in patients who were not candidates for or declined radical cystectomy (RC).

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed NMIBC patients with BCG failure who received gem/doce from April 2019 through October 2022 at the CHU de Québec-Université Laval. Patients received at least five weekly intravesical instillations according to published protocols. Patients who responded to gem/doce had maintenance instillations monthly for up to two years. Primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary outcomes included recurrence-free survival (RFS), cystectomy-free survival (CFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), and treatment adverse events. Survival probabilities were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method from the first gem/doce instillation.

Results: Thirty-five patients with a median age of 78 years old were included in the study. The median followup time was 21 months (interquartile range 10-29). More than 25% of patients received two or more prior BCG induction treatments. Overall and MIBC PFS estimates at one year were 85% and 88%, and at two years, 60% and 70%, respectively. Adverse events occurred in 37% of the patients, but only two patients didn't complete the treatment due to intolerance. Three patients underwent RC due to cancer progression. OS was 94% at two years.

Conclusions: With 60% of PFS at two years, gem/doce appears to be a safe and well-tolerated option for BCG failure patients. Further studies are needed to justify widespread use.