SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türk Üroloji Dergisi/Turkish Journal of Urology / 2010 / Cilt: 36 - Sayı: 1

Comparison of the radical cystectomy and bladder-sparing treatments in terms of survival and quality of life in bladder cancer treatment: A retrospective study

Mesane kanseri tedavisinde radikal sistektomi ile mesane koruyucu yaklaşımların sağkalım ve yaşam kalitesi yönünden karşılaştırması: Geriye dönük bir çalışma

Utku SARI
Önder CANGÜVEN
Ahmet SELİMOĞLU
Cemal GÖKTAŞ
Rahim HORUZ
Göksel AYKÖSE
Mihriban KOÇAK
Selami ALBAYRAK
Pages
18–24
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Objective: We investigated the overall survival and life quality in high risk T1G3 and invasive bladder cancer patients who were treated with radical cystectomy-urinary diversion approach or bladder-sparing treatment (BST).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: We investigated the overall survival and life quality in high risk T1G3 and invasive bladder cancer patients who were treated with radical cystectomy-urinary diversion approach or bladder-sparing treatment (BST).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and methods: Thirty-two patients treated with BST (Group 1) and 35 patients treated with radical cystectomy-urinary diversion approach (Group 2) between 2001 and 2007 in our hospital were compared retrospectively.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These two treatment modalities were also found to be not superior to each other according to the results of the quality of life questionnaire.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2001 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: We investigated the overall survival and life quality in high risk T1G3 and invasive bladder cancer patients who were treated with radical cystectomy-urinary diversion approach or bladder-sparing treatment (BST). Materials and methods: Thirty-two patients treated with BST (Group 1) and 35 patients treated with radical cystectomy-urinary diversion approach (Group 2) between 2001 and 2007 in our hospital were compared retrospectively. The Turkish version of the quality of life questionnaire consisting of 30 questions and developed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer was applied to assess the quality of life. Results: Overall survival rates of the one and two years were determined as 93.2% and 58.5% in Group 1, 86.9% and 67.5% in Group 2, respectively. The mean time until progression was 28.4 months in Group 1 and 55.4 months in Group 2. The progression-free survival rate at one and two years were determined as 93.2% and 58.5% in Group 1, and 86.9% and 67.5% in Group 2, respectively. Conclusion: For the overall and progression-free survival rates at two years, no significant difference was found between the patients treated with radical cystectomy-urinary diversion and BST. These two treatment modalities were also found to be not superior to each other according to the results of the quality of life questionnaire.

Özet

Amaç: Yüksek riskli T1G3 ve invazif mesane kanseri bulunan ve radikal sistektomi-üriner diversiyon yaklaşımı ya da mesane koruyucu tedavi (MKT) uygulanmış olan hastalarda genel sağkalımı ve yaşam kalitesini araştırdık. Gereç ve yöntem: Hastanemizde 2001-2007 yılları arasında mesane kanseri nedeniyle MKT uygulanan 32 hasta (Grup1) ile radikal sistektomi-üriner diversiyon yapılan 35 hasta (Grup 2) retrospektif olarak karşılaştırıldı. Yaşam kalitesini değerlendirmek amacı ile, Avrupa Kanser Araştırma ve Tedavi Merkezi tarafından geliştirilen ve 30 sorudan oluşan QLQ-C30 yaşam kalitesi değerlendirme anketinin Türkçe versiyonu uygulandı. Bulgular: Bir ve iki yıllık genel sağkalım oranları Grup 1 için sırasıyla %93.2 ve %58.5 iken, Grup 2 için %86.9 ve %67.5 olarak saptandı. Progresyona kadar geçen ortalama süre Grup 1’de 28.4 ay ve Grup 2’de 55.4 ay idi. Bir ve iki yıllık progresyonsuz sağkalım Grup 1 için sırasıyla %72.9 ve %49.8 iken Grup 2 için %80.4 ve %61.9 olarak bulundu. Sonuç: İki yıllık genel ve progresyonsuz sağkalım oranları açısından radikal sistektomi-üriner diversiyon ve MKT yapılan hastalar arasında anlamlı bir fark saptanmamıştır. Yaşam kalitesi anketi sonuçlarının değerlendirmesinde de her iki tedavinin birbirlerine üstün olmadığı bulunmuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

SARI, U., CANGÜVEN, Ö., SELİMOĞLU, A., GÖKTAŞ, C., HORUZ, R., AYKÖSE, G., KOÇAK, M., ALBAYRAK, S. (2010). Comparison of the radical cystectomy and bladder-sparing treatments in terms of survival and quality of life in bladder cancer treatment: A retrospective study. Türk Üroloji Dergisi/Turkish Journal of Urology, Cilt: 36 - Sayı: 1, 18–24. https://ajindex.com/articles/328116

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Housset M, Maulard C, Chretien Y, Dufour B, Delanian S, Huart J, et al. Combined radiation and chemotherapy for invasive transitional-cell carcinoma of the bladder: a prospective study. J Clin Oncol 1993;11:2150-7
  2. Fellin G, Graffer U, Bolner A, Ambrosini G, Caffo O, Luciani L. Combined chemotherapy and radiation with selective organ preservation for muscle-invasive bladder carcinoma. A single-institution phase II study. Br J Urol 1997;80:44-9
  3. Zietman AL, Grocela J, Zehr E, Kaufman DS, Young RH, Althausen AF, et al. Selective bladder conservation using transurethral resection, chemotherapy, and radiation: management and consequences of Ta, T1, and Tis recurrence within the retained bladder. Urology 2001;58:380-5
  4. WHO Handbook for Reporting Results of Cancer Treatment. WHO Offset publication. No
  5. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1979
  6. Trotti A, Byhardt R, Stetz J, Gwede C, Corn B, Fu K, et al. Common toxicity criteria: version 2.0. an improved reference for grading the acute effects of cancer treatment: impact on radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000;47:13-47
  7. Güzelant A, Göksel T, Özkök S, Taşbakan S, Aysan T, Bottomley A. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: an examination into the cultural validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2004;13:135-44
  8. Kachnic LA, Kaufman DS, Heney NM, Althausen AF, Griffin PP, Zietman AL, et al. Bladder preservation by combined modality therapy for invasive bladder cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997;15:1022-9
  9. Pagano F, Bassi P, Galetti TP, Meneghini A, Milani C, Artibani W, et al. Results of contemporary radical cystectomy for invasive bladder cancer: a clinicopathological study with an emphasis on the inadequacy of the tumor, nodes and metastases classification. J Urol 1991;145:45-50
  10. Cancrini A, De Carli P, Pompeo V, Fattahi H, Lamanna L, Giuseppe C, et al. Lower urinary tract reconstruction following cystectomy: experience and results in 96 patients using the orthotopic ileal bladder substitution of Studer et al. Eur Urol 1996;29:204-9
  11. Hautmann RE, de Petriconi R, Gottfried HW, Kleinschmidt K, Mattes R, Paiss T. The ileal neobladder: complications and functional results in 363 patients after 11 years of followup. J Urol 1999;161:422-7
  12. Popov Z, Stavridis A, Lekovski L, Penev M, Dohcev S, Stankov O, et al. Urinary diversion: 30 years experience of a single centre in Republic of Macedonia. Acta