Complications and Outcomes of Salvage Cystectomy after Trimodality Therapy

No AccessJournal of UrologyAdult Urology1 Jul 2021Complications and Outcomes of Salvage Cystectomy after Trimodality TherapyThis article is commented on by the following:Editorial Comment Alberto Pieretti, Ross Krasnow, Michael Drumm, Andrew Gusev, Douglas M. Dahl, Francis McGovern, Michael L. Blute, William U. Shipley, Jason A. Efstathiou, Adam S. Feldman, and Matthew F. Wszolek Alberto PierettiAlberto Pieretti Department of Urology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas More articles by this author , Ross KrasnowRoss Krasnow Department of Urology, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, D.C. More articles by this author , Michael DrummMichael Drumm Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author , Andrew GusevAndrew Gusev Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author , Douglas M. DahlDouglas M. Dahl Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author , Francis McGovernFrancis McGovern Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author , Michael L. BluteMichael L. Blute Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author , William U. ShipleyWilliam U. Shipley Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author , Jason A. EfstathiouJason A. Efstathiou Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts Financial and/or other relationship with Boston Scientific, Blue Earth Diagnostics, Taris Biomedical. More articles by this author , Adam S. FeldmanAdam S. Feldman Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts Financial and/or other relationship with Olympus America, Inc., Roche Pharmaceuticals, Janssen Pharmaceuticals. More articles by this author , and Matthew F. WszolekMatthew F. Wszolek ‡Correspondence: Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St., GRB 1102, Boston, Massachusetts 02114 telephone: 857-238-3838; FAX: 617-726-6131; E-mail Address: [email protected] Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000001696AboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract Purpose: Salvage cystectomy is required for some patients with intravesical recurrence after trimodality therapy. We compared postoperative outcomes between salvage cystectomy post-trimodality therapy, primary cystectomy and primary cystectomy with prior history of nontrimodality therapy abdominal or pelvic radiotherapy. Materials and Methods: We included 265 patients who underwent radical cystectomy at Massachusetts General Hospital for cT1-T4 bladder cancer between 2003 and 2013. Patients were grouped as salvage cystectomy post-trimodality therapy, primary cystectomy or primary cystectomy with prior history of nontrimodality therapy abdominal or pelvic radiotherapy. Early (≤90 days) and late (>90 days) complications were compared. Disease-specific survival and overall survival were calculated using a Cox regression model, and adjusted survival curves were generated. Results: The median followup from the time of cystectomy was 65.5 months. There was no difference in intraoperative and early complications between the groups. The detection of late complications was higher in salvage cystectomy post-trimodality therapy compared to primary cystectomy and primary cystectomy with prior history of nontrimodality therapy abdominal or pelvic radiotherapy (p=0.03). In multivariable Cox regression analysis, salvage cystectomy post-trimodality therapy was associated with a higher incidence of any late (HR 2.3, p=0.02) and major late complications (HR 2.1, p <0.05). There was no difference in disease-specific survival (p=0.8) or overall survival (p=0.9) between the groups. Conclusions: Salvage cystectomy post-trimodality therapy for intravesical recurrence post-trimodality therapy has an intraoperative and early complication rate comparable to primary cystectomy and primary cystectomy with prior history of nontrimodality therapy abdominal or pelvic radiotherapy. Salvage cystectomy post-trimodality therapy is associated with a higher risk of overall and major late complications than primary cystectomy. The disease-specific survival and overall survival of patients who require salvage cystectomy post-trimodality therapy are comparable to both groups. References 1. : Treatment of non-metastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer: AUA/ASCO/ASTRO/SUO guideline. J Urol 2017; 198: 552. Link, Google Scholar 2. : Updated 2016 EAU guidelines on muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer. Eur Urol 2017; 71: 462. Google Scholar 3. : Radical cystectomy in the treatment of invasive bladder cancer: long-term results in 1,054 patients. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 666. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 4. : Long-term outcomes after bladder-preserving tri-modality therapy for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer: an updated analysis of the Massachusetts general hospital experience. Eur Urol 2017; 71: 952. Google Scholar 5. : Propensity score analysis of radical cystectomy versus bladder-sparing trimodal therapy in the setting of a multidisciplinary bladder cancer clinic. J Clin Oncol 2017; 35: 2299. Google Scholar 6. : Combined-modality treatment and selective organ preservation in invasive bladder cancer: long-term results. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20: 3061. Google Scholar 7. : Complications and long-term results of salvage cystectomy after failed bladder sparing therapy for muscle invasive bladder cancer. J Urol 2012; 187: 463. Link, Google Scholar 8. : Phase III trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with invasive bladder cancer treated with selective bladder preservation by combined radiation therapy and chemotherapy: initial results of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 89-03. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 3576. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 9. : A phase I/II trial of transurethral surgery combined with concurrent cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil and twice daily radiation followed by selective bladder preservation in operable patients with muscle invading bladder cancer. J Urol 1998; 160: 1673. Link, Google Scholar 10. : An update of combined modality therapy for patients with muscle invading bladder cancer using selective bladder preservation or cystectomy. J Urol 1999; 162: 445. Link, Google Scholar 11. : The initial results in muscle-invading bladder cancer of RTOG 95-06: phase I/II trial of transurethral surgery plus radiation therapy with concurrent cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil followed by selective bladder preservation or cystectomy depending on the initial response. Oncologist 2000; 5: 471. Google Scholar 12. : Selective bladder preservation by combined modality protocol treatment: long-term outcomes of 190 patients with invasive bladder cancer. Urology 2002; 60: 62. Google Scholar 13. : RTOG 97-06: initial report of a phase I-II trial of selective bladder conservation using TURBT, twice-daily accelerated irradiation sensitized with cisplatin, and adjuvant MCV combination chemotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003; 57: 665. Google Scholar 14. : Phase I-II RTOG study (99-06) of patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer undergoing transurethral surgery, paclitaxel, cisplatin, and twice-daily radiotherapy followed by selective bladder preservation or radical cystectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy. Urology 2009; 73: 833. Google Scholar 15. : A model for neural development and treatment of Rett syndrome using human induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell 2010; 143: 527. Google Scholar 16. : Long-term outcomes of selective bladder preservation by combined-modality therapy for invasive bladder cancer: the MGH experience. Eur Urol 2012; 61: 705. Google Scholar 17. : The American Joint Committee on Cancer: the 7th edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual and the future of TNM. Ann Surg Oncol 2010; 17: 1471. Google Scholar 18. : Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 2004; 240: 205. Google Scholar 19. : Potential impact of postoperative early complications on the timing of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients undergoing radical cystectomy: a high-volume tertiary cancer center experience. Eur Urol 2009; 55: 177. Google Scholar 20. : Salvage radical cystoprostatectomy and orthotopic urinary diversion following radiation failure. J Urol 1998; 160: 29. Link, Google Scholar 21. : Long-term results of ileocecal continent urinary diversion in patients treated with and without previous pelvic irradiation. J Urol 2058; 167: 2002. Google Scholar 22. : Salvage cystectomy after failure of interstitial radiotherapy and external beam radiotherapy for bladder cancer. BJU Int 2004; 94: 793. Google Scholar 23. : Early complications of cystectomy after high dose pelvic radiation. J Urol 2010; 184: 2264. Link, Google Scholar © 2021 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsRelated articlesJournal of Urology9 Apr 2021Editorial Comment Volume 206Issue 1July 2021Page: 29-36 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2021 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Keywordscystectomyurinary bladder neoplasmssalvage therapypostoperative complicationsMetricsAuthor Information Alberto Pieretti Department of Urology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas More articles by this author Ross Krasnow Department of Urology, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, D.C. More articles by this author Michael Drumm Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author Andrew Gusev Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author Douglas M. Dahl Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author Francis McGovern Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author Michael L. Blute Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author William U. Shipley Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author Jason A. Efstathiou Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts Financial and/or other relationship with Boston Scientific, Blue Earth Diagnostics, Taris Biomedical. More articles by this author Adam S. Feldman Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts Financial and/or other relationship with Olympus America, Inc., Roche Pharmaceuticals, Janssen Pharmaceuticals. More articles by this author Matthew F. Wszolek Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts ‡Correspondence: Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St., GRB 1102, Boston, Massachusetts 02114 telephone: 857-238-3838; FAX: 617-726-6131; E-mail Address: [email protected] More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...