Cargando…

Inadvertent radical nephrectomy leads to worse prognosis in renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma patients: A propensity score-matched study

OBJECTIVE: To compare overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma (RPUC) patients treated with radical nephroureterectomy (NU) and inadvertent radical nephrectomy (RN). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, patients with RPUC who underwe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wu, Feixiang, Zhang, Pan, Li, Lingxun, Lin, Shiqing, Liu, Jianhong, Sun, Yi, Wang, Yuanlong, Luo, Chengjun, Huang, Yu, Yan, Xiao, Zhang, Meng, Liu, Guixi, Li, Kun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9561472/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36249047
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.948223
_version_ 1784807957470380032
author Wu, Feixiang
Zhang, Pan
Li, Lingxun
Lin, Shiqing
Liu, Jianhong
Sun, Yi
Wang, Yuanlong
Luo, Chengjun
Huang, Yu
Yan, Xiao
Zhang, Meng
Liu, Guixi
Li, Kun
author_facet Wu, Feixiang
Zhang, Pan
Li, Lingxun
Lin, Shiqing
Liu, Jianhong
Sun, Yi
Wang, Yuanlong
Luo, Chengjun
Huang, Yu
Yan, Xiao
Zhang, Meng
Liu, Guixi
Li, Kun
author_sort Wu, Feixiang
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma (RPUC) patients treated with radical nephroureterectomy (NU) and inadvertent radical nephrectomy (RN). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, patients with RPUC who underwent NU or RN diagnosed between 2004 and 2017 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. To adjust the confounders, the propensity score-matched analysis was conducted. The Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank test were performed to explore the effect of different surgical methods on OS and CSS. RESULTS: A total of 2197 cases were finally included in this analysis, among which, 187 (8.5%) patients were treated with RN and 2010 (91.5%) patients were treated with NU. Before matching, the survival analysis revealed that the OS (HR: 1.444, 95%CI: 1.197, 1.741) and CSS (HR: 1.522, 95%CI: 1.211, 1.914) of patients who received RN were worse than that of patients who received NU (p = 0.0001 and p = 0.0003, respectively). After matching, the RN group had a worse OS (HR: 1.298, 95%CI: 1.002, 1.682) than the NU group (p = 0.048). No significant difference was observed in CSS between the RN and NU groups (p = 0.282). The hierarchical analysis showed that there was no significant difference observed in OS and CSS in patients with tumor size ≤4.2 cm (p = 0.884 and p = 0.496, respectively). In tumor size >4.2 cm, both OS (HR: 1.545, 95%CI: 1.225, 1.948) and CSS (HR: 1.607, 95%CI: 1.233, 2.095) of patients who received RN were worse than those of patients who received NU (p = 0.0002 and p = 0.0005). CONCLUSION: RN could lead to worse oncological outcomes than NU in patients with renal pelvis urothelial carcinoma. Accurate diagnosis of renal pelvis urothelial carcinoma is extremely important.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9561472
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95614722022-10-15 Inadvertent radical nephrectomy leads to worse prognosis in renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma patients: A propensity score-matched study Wu, Feixiang Zhang, Pan Li, Lingxun Lin, Shiqing Liu, Jianhong Sun, Yi Wang, Yuanlong Luo, Chengjun Huang, Yu Yan, Xiao Zhang, Meng Liu, Guixi Li, Kun Front Oncol Oncology OBJECTIVE: To compare overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma (RPUC) patients treated with radical nephroureterectomy (NU) and inadvertent radical nephrectomy (RN). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, patients with RPUC who underwent NU or RN diagnosed between 2004 and 2017 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. To adjust the confounders, the propensity score-matched analysis was conducted. The Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank test were performed to explore the effect of different surgical methods on OS and CSS. RESULTS: A total of 2197 cases were finally included in this analysis, among which, 187 (8.5%) patients were treated with RN and 2010 (91.5%) patients were treated with NU. Before matching, the survival analysis revealed that the OS (HR: 1.444, 95%CI: 1.197, 1.741) and CSS (HR: 1.522, 95%CI: 1.211, 1.914) of patients who received RN were worse than that of patients who received NU (p = 0.0001 and p = 0.0003, respectively). After matching, the RN group had a worse OS (HR: 1.298, 95%CI: 1.002, 1.682) than the NU group (p = 0.048). No significant difference was observed in CSS between the RN and NU groups (p = 0.282). The hierarchical analysis showed that there was no significant difference observed in OS and CSS in patients with tumor size ≤4.2 cm (p = 0.884 and p = 0.496, respectively). In tumor size >4.2 cm, both OS (HR: 1.545, 95%CI: 1.225, 1.948) and CSS (HR: 1.607, 95%CI: 1.233, 2.095) of patients who received RN were worse than those of patients who received NU (p = 0.0002 and p = 0.0005). CONCLUSION: RN could lead to worse oncological outcomes than NU in patients with renal pelvis urothelial carcinoma. Accurate diagnosis of renal pelvis urothelial carcinoma is extremely important. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-09-30 /pmc/articles/PMC9561472/ /pubmed/36249047 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.948223 Text en Copyright © 2022 Wu, Zhang, Li, Lin, Liu, Sun, Wang, Luo, Huang, Yan, Zhang, Liu and Li https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Oncology
Wu, Feixiang
Zhang, Pan
Li, Lingxun
Lin, Shiqing
Liu, Jianhong
Sun, Yi
Wang, Yuanlong
Luo, Chengjun
Huang, Yu
Yan, Xiao
Zhang, Meng
Liu, Guixi
Li, Kun
Inadvertent radical nephrectomy leads to worse prognosis in renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma patients: A propensity score-matched study
title Inadvertent radical nephrectomy leads to worse prognosis in renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma patients: A propensity score-matched study
title_full Inadvertent radical nephrectomy leads to worse prognosis in renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma patients: A propensity score-matched study
title_fullStr Inadvertent radical nephrectomy leads to worse prognosis in renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma patients: A propensity score-matched study
title_full_unstemmed Inadvertent radical nephrectomy leads to worse prognosis in renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma patients: A propensity score-matched study
title_short Inadvertent radical nephrectomy leads to worse prognosis in renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma patients: A propensity score-matched study
title_sort inadvertent radical nephrectomy leads to worse prognosis in renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma patients: a propensity score-matched study
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9561472/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36249047
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.948223
work_keys_str_mv AT wufeixiang inadvertentradicalnephrectomyleadstoworseprognosisinrenalpelvicurothelialcarcinomapatientsapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT zhangpan inadvertentradicalnephrectomyleadstoworseprognosisinrenalpelvicurothelialcarcinomapatientsapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT lilingxun inadvertentradicalnephrectomyleadstoworseprognosisinrenalpelvicurothelialcarcinomapatientsapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT linshiqing inadvertentradicalnephrectomyleadstoworseprognosisinrenalpelvicurothelialcarcinomapatientsapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT liujianhong inadvertentradicalnephrectomyleadstoworseprognosisinrenalpelvicurothelialcarcinomapatientsapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT sunyi inadvertentradicalnephrectomyleadstoworseprognosisinrenalpelvicurothelialcarcinomapatientsapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT wangyuanlong inadvertentradicalnephrectomyleadstoworseprognosisinrenalpelvicurothelialcarcinomapatientsapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT luochengjun inadvertentradicalnephrectomyleadstoworseprognosisinrenalpelvicurothelialcarcinomapatientsapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT huangyu inadvertentradicalnephrectomyleadstoworseprognosisinrenalpelvicurothelialcarcinomapatientsapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT yanxiao inadvertentradicalnephrectomyleadstoworseprognosisinrenalpelvicurothelialcarcinomapatientsapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT zhangmeng inadvertentradicalnephrectomyleadstoworseprognosisinrenalpelvicurothelialcarcinomapatientsapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT liuguixi inadvertentradicalnephrectomyleadstoworseprognosisinrenalpelvicurothelialcarcinomapatientsapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT likun inadvertentradicalnephrectomyleadstoworseprognosisinrenalpelvicurothelialcarcinomapatientsapropensityscorematchedstudy