Contemporary rates of adherence to international guidelines for pelvic lymph node dissection in radical cystectomy: a population-based study

World Journal of Urology

Volumn 36, Issue 9, 2018, Pages 1417-1422

  Zaffuto, Emanuele ^a,b   Bandini, Marco ^a,b   Gazdovich, Stéphanie ^b   Valiquette, Anne Sophie ^b   Leyh Bannurah, Sami Ramzi ^b,c   Tian, Zhe ^b,d   Dell’Oglio, Paolo ^a   Graefen, Markus ^c   Moschini, Marco ^a   Necchi, Andrea ^e   Shariat, Shahrokh F ^f   Briganti, Alberto ^a   Montorsi, Francesco ^a   Karakiewicz, Pierre I ^b  

^a SAN RAFFAELE HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^b CENTRE HOSPITALIER DE L UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER HAMBURG EPPENDORF   (Germany)

^d MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^e NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (Italy)

^f MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

Author keywords

Bladder cancer; Guidelines adherence; Lymph nodes; NIS; Radical cystectomy

Indexed keywords

AGE; AGED; ANCESTRY GROUP; CYSTECTOMY; FACTUAL DATABASE; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HOSPITAL; HUMAN; LOW VOLUME HOSPITAL; LYMPH NODE; LYMPH NODE DISSECTION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PELVIS; PROCEDURES; PROTOCOL COMPLIANCE; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SEX FACTOR; STANDARDS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION; UNITED STATES;

AGE FACTORS; AGED; CONTINENTAL POPULATION GROUPS; CYSTECTOMY; DATABASES, FACTUAL; FEMALE; GUIDELINE ADHERENCE; HEALTH SERVICES ACCESSIBILITY; HOSPITALS; HOSPITALS, LOW-VOLUME; HUMANS; LYMPH NODE EXCISION; LYMPH NODES; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PELVIS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SEX FACTORS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 85046029824     PISSN: 07244983     EISSN: 14338726     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00345-018-2306-7     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Spiess PE, Agarwal N, Bangs R et al (2017) Bladder cancer, Version 5.2017, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw JNCCN 15:1240–1267. 10.6004/jnccn.2017.0156
2. Witjes JA, Comperat E, Cowan NC et al (2015) EAU guidelines on muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer. Eur Assoc Urol
3. Skinner DG (1982) Management of invasive bladder cancer: a meticulous pelvic node dissection can make a difference. J Urol 128:34–36
4. Vieweg J, Gschwend JE, Herr HW, Fair WR (1999) Pelvic lymph node dissection can be curative in patients with node positive bladder cancer. J Urol 161:449–454
5. Thurairaja R, Studer UE, Burkhard FC (2009) Indications, extent, and benefits of pelvic lymph node dissection for patients with bladder and prostate cancer. Oncologist 14:40–51. 10.1634/theoncologist.2008-0123
6. Chou R, Selph SS, Buckley DI et al (2016) Treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review. Cancer. 10.1002/cncr.29843
7. Sundi D, Svatek RS, Nielsen ME et al (2014) Extent of pelvic lymph node dissection during radical cystectomy: is bigger better? Rev Urol 16:159–166. 10.3909/riu0626
8. Konety BR, Joslyn S, O’Donnell MA (2003) Extent of pelvic lymphadenectomy and its impact on outcome in patients diagnosed with bladder cancer: analysis of data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program data base. J Urol 169:946–950. 10.1097/01.ju.0000052721.61645.a3
9. Hellenthal NJ, Ramirez ML, Evans CP et al (2009) Trends in pelvic lymphadenectomy at the time of radical cystectomy: 1988–2004. J Urol 181:2490–2495. 10.1016/j.juro.2009.02.031
10. Abdollah F, Sun M, Schmitges J et al (2012) Stage-specific impact of pelvic lymph node dissection on survival in patients with non-metastatic bladder cancer treated with radical cystectomy. BJU Int 109:1147–1154. 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10482.x
11. Abdollah F, Schmitges J, Sun M et al (2011) Hospital and surgical caseload are predictors of comprehensive surgical treatment for bladder cancer: a population based study. J Urol 186:824–828. 10.1016/j.juro.2011.04.066
12. The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. In: Nationwide inpatient sample NIS. http://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/nis-overview.jsp
13. Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) Redesign Final Report# 2014-04. In: HCUP Methods Ser. https://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/methods/2014-04.pdf. Accessed 24 May 2016
14. Trend Weights for HCUP NIS Data. In: Healthc. Cost Util. Proj. https://hcup-us.ahrq.gov/db/nation/nis/trendwghts.jsp
15. Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Ciol MA (1992) Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 45:613–619. 10.1016/0895-4356(92)90133-8
16. Konety BR, Dhawan V, Allareddy V, Joslyn SA (2005) Impact of hospital and surgeon volume on in-hospital mortality from radical cystectomy: data from the health care utilization project. J Urol 173:1695–1700. 10.1097/01.ju.0000154638.61621.03
17. Dobruch J, Daneshmand S, Fisch M et al (2016) Gender and bladder cancer: a collaborative review of etiology, biology, and outcomes. Eur Urol 69:300–310. 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.08.037
18. Thorstenson A, Hagberg O, Ljungberg B et al (2016) Gender-related differences in urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: a population-based study from the Swedish National Registry of Urinary Bladder Cancer. Scand J Urol 1805:1–6. 10.3109/21681805.2016.1158207
19. Yee DS, Ishill NM, Lowrance WT et al (2011) Ethnic differences in bladder cancer survival. Urology 78:544–549. 10.1016/j.urology.2011.02.042
20. Klaassen Z, DiBianco JM, Jen RP et al (2016) Female, black, and unmarried patients are more likely to present with metastatic bladder urothelial carcinoma. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 10.1016/j.clgc.2016.04.006
21. Faiena I, Dombrovskiy V, Koprowski C et al (2014) Performance of partial cystectomy in the United States from 2001 to 2010: trends and comparative outcomes. Can J Urol 21:7520–7527
22. Bianchi M, Trinh Q-D, Sun M et al (2012) Impact of academic affiliation on radical cystectomy outcomes in North America: a population-based study. Can Urol Assoc J J Assoc Urol Can 6:245–250. 10.5489/cuaj.12032