Clinical genitourinary cancer · 2023
Practice Patterns Regarding Female Reproductive Organ-Sparing and Nerve-Sparing Radical Cystectomy Among Urologic Oncologists in the United States.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка службы здравоохранения 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.
Gupta Natasha, Kucirka Lauren, Semerjian Alice, Pierorazio Phillip M, Loeb Stacy, Bivalacqua Trinity J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Female reproductive organ-sparing (ROS) and nerve-sparing radical cystectomy (RC) techniques have been shown to be oncologically safe and to improve sexual function outcomes among select patients with organ-confined disease. We sought to characterize practice patterns regarding female ROS and nerve-sparing RC among US urologists.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of members of the Society of Urologic Oncology to assess provider-reported frequency of ROS and nerve-sparing RC in premenopausal and postmenopausal patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer that failed intravesical therapy or clinically localized muscle-invasive bladder cancer.
RESULTS: Among 101 urologists, 80 (79.2%) reported that they routinely resect the uterus/cervix, 68 (67.3%) the neurovascular bundle, 49 (48.5%) the ovaries, and 19 (18.8%) a portion of the vagina when performing RC in premenopausal patients with organ-confined disease. When asked about changes to approach in postmenopausal patients, 71 participants (70.3%) reported that they were less likely to spare the uterus/cervix, 44 (43.6%) were less likely to spare the neurovascular bundle, 70 (69.3%) were less likely to spare the ovaries, and 23 (22.8%) were less likely to spare a portion of the vagina.
CONCLUSION: We identified significant gaps in adoption of female ROS and nerve-sparing RC techniques for patients with organ-confined disease, despite evidence that ROS and nerve-sparing techniques are oncologically safe and can optimize functional outcomes in select patients. Future efforts should improve provider training in and education about ROS and nerve-sparing RC to improve postoperative outcomes among female patients.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of members of the Society of Urologic Oncology to assess provider-reported frequency of ROS and nerve-sparing RC in premenopausal and postmenopausal patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer that failed intravesical therapy or clinically localized muscle-invasive bladder cancer.
RESULTS: Among 101 urologists, 80 (79.2%) reported that they routinely resect the uterus/cervix, 68 (67.3%) the neurovascular bundle, 49 (48.5%) the ovaries, and 19 (18.8%) a portion of the vagina when performing RC in premenopausal patients with organ-confined disease. When asked about changes to approach in postmenopausal patients, 71 participants (70.3%) reported that they were less likely to spare the uterus/cervix, 44 (43.6%) were less likely to spare the neurovascular bundle, 70 (69.3%) were less likely to spare the ovaries, and 23 (22.8%) were less likely to spare a portion of the vagina.
CONCLUSION: We identified significant gaps in adoption of female ROS and nerve-sparing RC techniques for patients with organ-confined disease, despite evidence that ROS and nerve-sparing techniques are oncologically safe and can optimize functional outcomes in select patients. Future efforts should improve provider training in and education about ROS and nerve-sparing RC to improve postoperative outcomes among female patients.