Robot-assisted versus open radical nephroureterectomy for urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract: A retrospective cohort study across ten years

2021 ◽  
pp. 101607
Author(s):  
Philip Zeuschner ◽  
Sarah Grosse Vollmer ◽  
Johannes Linxweiler ◽  
Gudrun Wagenpfeil ◽  
Stefan Wagenpfeil ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Urinary Tract ◽  
Urothelial Carcinoma ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Upper Urinary Tract ◽  
Radical Nephroureterectomy ◽  
Robot Assisted

scholarly journals Comparison of oncologic and functional outcomes between radical nephroureterectomy and segmental ureterectomy for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tae Heon Kim ◽  
Chung Un Lee ◽  
Minyong Kang ◽  
Hwang Gyun Jeon ◽  
Byong Chang Jeong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Urinary Tract ◽  
Urothelial Carcinoma ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Upper Urinary Tract ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Radical Nephroureterectomy ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Segmental Ureterectomy ◽  
Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma

AbstractThis study aims to compare oncologic and functional outcomes after radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) and segmental ureterectomy (SU) in patients with upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). We retrospectively collected data on patients who underwent either RNU or SU of UTUC. Propensity score matching was performed among 394 cases to yield a final cohort of 40 RNU and 40 SU cases. Kaplan–Meier analysis and the log-rank test were used to compare overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), progression-free survival (PFS), and intravesical recurrence-free survival (IVRFS) between the groups. We also compared the change in postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). There was no significant difference in terms of CSS, PFS, and IVRFS between the RNU and SU groups, but the RNU group had a better OS than the SU group (p = 0.032). Postoperative eGFR was better preserved in the SU group than in the RNU group (p < 0.001). SU provides comparable CSS, PFS, and IVRFS for patients with UTUC compared to RNU, even in patients with advanced-stage and/or high-grade cancer. Further, SU achieves better preservation of renal function.

scholarly journals Combination of pembrolizumab and BCG treatment after endoscopic ablation of high-risk superficial upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma in patients not candidates for radical nephroureterectomy: protocol for phase-II study

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. e027066
Author(s):  
Marcus L Jamil ◽  
Mustafa Deebajah ◽  
Akshay Sood ◽  
Shaheen Alanee
Keyword(s):  
Urinary Tract ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Urothelial Carcinoma ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Upper Urinary Tract ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Radical Nephroureterectomy ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Muscle Invasive ◽  
Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma

IntroductionThe treatment standard for high-risk upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UUTUC) is radical nephroureterectomy. However, some patients may be unfit or unwilling, and in such patients the available alternatives are suboptimal. Therapies targeting the programmed death (PD) pathway have shown promise in urothelial carcinom (UC). We designed the current study to determine the safety and efficacy of administering MK-3475 (a monoclonal antibody targeting interaction between PD-1 and its ligand) in combination with bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) in high-risk non-muscle invasive UUTUC patients.MethodsThis represents a single-centre phase-II efficacy study of MK-3475 therapy in combination with BCG for subjects, 18 years of age or older, with pathologically documented non-muscle invasive high-risk UUTUC unfit or unwilling to be treated with radical nephroureterectomy. Twenty subjects will be enrolled; patients will receive treatment with 200 mg of MK-3475 every 21 days, starting 2 weeks from the initial endoscopic resection and continuing for 6 weeks after the final dose of BCG. The primary objective is to determine the safety and efficacy of administering MK-3475 at a fixed dose of 200 mg every 3 weeks in conjunction with intrapelvic BCG. Secondary objectives include 19 week and the 3, 12 and 24-month post-treatment completion complete response and progression-free rate assessments.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Henry Ford Hospital. The results of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at a scientific conference.Trial registration numberNCT03345134

scholarly journals Oral fosfomycin for treatment of urinary tract infection: a retrospective cohort study

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Philippa C. Matthews ◽  
Lucinda K. Barrett ◽  
Stephanie Warren ◽  
Nicole Stoesser ◽  
Mel Snelling ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Urinary Tract Infection ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Urinary Tract ◽  
Tract Infection ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort

scholarly journals Fosfomycin versus Ertapenem for Outpatient Treatment of Complicated Urinary Tract Infections: A Multicenter, Retrospective Cohort Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noah Wald-Dickler ◽  
Todd C Lee ◽  
Soodtida Tangpraphaphorn ◽  
Susan M Butler-Wu ◽  
Nina Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Urinary Tract ◽  
Los Angeles ◽  
Urinary Tract Infections ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Outpatient Treatment ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Clinical Success ◽  
Public Hospitals ◽  
Tract Infections

Abstract Objectives We sought to determine the comparative efficacy of fosfomycin vs. ertapenem for outpatient treatment of complicated urinary tract infections (cUTI). Methods We conducted a multi-centered, retrospective cohort study involving patients with cUTI treated with outpatient oral fosfomycin vs. intravenous ertapenem at three public hospitals in Los Angeles County between January 2018 and September 2020. The primary outcome was resolution of clinical symptoms 30 days after diagnosis. Results We identified 322 patients with cUTI treated with fosfomycin (n = 110) or ertapenem (n = 212) meeting study criteria. Study arms had similar demographics, although patients treated with ertapenem more frequently had pyelonephritis or bacteremia while fosfomycin-treated patients had more retained catheters, nephrolithiasis, or urinary obstruction. Most infections were due to extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing E. coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae; 80-90% of which were resistant to other oral options. Adjusted odds ratios for clinical success at 30 days, clinical success at last follow up, and relapse were 1.21 (0.68 to 2.16), 0.84 (0.46 to 1.52), and 0.94 (0.52 to 1.70), for fosfomycin vs. ertapenem, respectively. Patients treated with fosfomycin had significant reductions in length of hospital stay and length of antimicrobial therapy, and fewer adverse events (1 vs. 10). Fosfomycin outcomes were similar irrespective of duration of lead-in IV therapy or fosfomycin dosing interval (daily, every other day, every third day). Conclusion These results would support the conduct of a randomized controlled trial to verify efficacy. In the meantime, they suggest fosfomycin may be a reasonable stepdown from IV antibiotics for cUTI.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document