BJU international · 2023
Diagnostic evaluation of upper tract urothelial carcinoma: can we safely omit diagnostic ureteroscopy?
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Trail Matthew, Rahman Muhammad Sajid Waheed, Broadhurst William J, Blackmur James P, Sharma Abhishek, Chew Etienne, O'Donnell Marie, Keanie Julian Y, Brush John, Taylor John, Phipps Simon, Thomas Ben, Mains Edward A A, McNeill S Alan, Leung Steve, Cutress Mark L, Laird Alexander
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To identify clinicopathological or radiological factors that may predict a diagnosis of upper urinary tract urothelial cell carcinoma (UTUC) to inform which patients can proceed directly to radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) without the delay for diagnostic ureteroscopy (URS).
PATIENTS AND METHODS: All consecutive patients investigated for suspected UTUC in a high-volume UK centre between 2011 and 2017 were identified through retrospective analysis of surgical logbooks and a prospectively maintained pathology database. Details on clinical presentation, radiological findings, and URS/RNU histopathology results were evaluated. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to evaluate predictors of a final diagnosis of UTUC.
RESULTS: In all, 260 patients were investigated, of whom 230 (89.2%) underwent URS. RNU was performed in 131 patients (50.4%), of whom 25 (9.6%) proceeded directly without URS - all of whom had a final histopathological diagnosis of UTUC - and 15 (11.5%) underwent RNU after URS despite no conclusive histopathological confirmation of UTUC. Major surgery was avoided in 77 patients (33.5%) where a benign or alternative diagnosis was made on URS, and 14 patients (6.1%) underwent nephron-sparing surgery. Overall, 178 patients (68.5%) had a final diagnosis of UTUC confirmed on URS/RNU histopathology. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, a presenting complaint of visible haematuria (hazard ratio [HR] 5.17, confidence interval [CI] 1.91-14.0; P = 0.001), a solid lesion reported on imaging (HR 37.8, CI = 11.7-122.1; P < 0.001) and a history of smoking (HR 3.07, CI 1.35-6.97; P = 0.007), were predictive of a final diagnosis of UTUC. From this cohort, 51 (96.2%) of 53 smokers who presented with visible haematuria and who had a solid lesion on computed tomography urogram had UTUC on final histopathology.
CONCLUSION: We identified specific factors which may assist clinicians in selecting which patients may reliably proceed to RNU without the delay of diagnostic URS. These findings may inform a prospective multicentre analysis including additional variables such as urinary cytology.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: All consecutive patients investigated for suspected UTUC in a high-volume UK centre between 2011 and 2017 were identified through retrospective analysis of surgical logbooks and a prospectively maintained pathology database. Details on clinical presentation, radiological findings, and URS/RNU histopathology results were evaluated. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to evaluate predictors of a final diagnosis of UTUC.
RESULTS: In all, 260 patients were investigated, of whom 230 (89.2%) underwent URS. RNU was performed in 131 patients (50.4%), of whom 25 (9.6%) proceeded directly without URS - all of whom had a final histopathological diagnosis of UTUC - and 15 (11.5%) underwent RNU after URS despite no conclusive histopathological confirmation of UTUC. Major surgery was avoided in 77 patients (33.5%) where a benign or alternative diagnosis was made on URS, and 14 patients (6.1%) underwent nephron-sparing surgery. Overall, 178 patients (68.5%) had a final diagnosis of UTUC confirmed on URS/RNU histopathology. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, a presenting complaint of visible haematuria (hazard ratio [HR] 5.17, confidence interval [CI] 1.91-14.0; P = 0.001), a solid lesion reported on imaging (HR 37.8, CI = 11.7-122.1; P < 0.001) and a history of smoking (HR 3.07, CI 1.35-6.97; P = 0.007), were predictive of a final diagnosis of UTUC. From this cohort, 51 (96.2%) of 53 smokers who presented with visible haematuria and who had a solid lesion on computed tomography urogram had UTUC on final histopathology.
CONCLUSION: We identified specific factors which may assist clinicians in selecting which patients may reliably proceed to RNU without the delay of diagnostic URS. These findings may inform a prospective multicentre analysis including additional variables such as urinary cytology.