nach oben

Erschienen in:

01.12.2024 | Topic Paper

Focused UTUC pathways with a risk-stratified approach to diagnostic ureteroscopy: is it the need of the hour? A retrospective cohort analysis

verfasst von: Kalpesh Parmar, Mark Hanson, Ahmed S. Mahrous, Francis X. Keeley Jr., Anthony G. Timoney, Salah Albuheissi, Bhavan Prasad Rai, Joe Philip

Erschienen in: World Journal of Urology | Ausgabe 1/2024

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction

Upper urinary tract urothelial cancer is a rare, aggressive variant of urinary tract cancer. There is often delay to diagnosis and management for this entity in view of diagnostic and staging challenges needing additional investigations and risk stratifications for improved outcomes. In this article, we share our experience in developing a dedicated diagnostic and treatment pathway for UTUC and assess its impact on time lines to radical nephroureterectomy (RNU). We also evaluate the impact of diagnostic ureteroscopy (DUR) on UTUC care pathways timelines.

Materials and methods

A prospective database was maintained for all patients who underwent a RNU from January 2015 to August 2022 in a high-volume single tertiary care centre in the UK. In 2019, a Focused UTUC pathway (FUP) was implemented at the centre to streamline diagnostic and RNU pathways. A retrospective analysis of the database was conducted to compare time lines and diagnostic trends between the pre-FUP and FUP cohorts. Primary outcome measures were time to RNU from MDT. Secondary outcome measures were: impact of DUR on time to RNU from MDT and negative UTUC rates between DUR and non-DUR cohorts. Differences in continuous variables across categories were assessed using the independent sample t test. Categorical variables between cohorts were analysed using the chi-square (χ²). Statistical significance in this study was set as p < 0.05.

Results

A total of 500 patients with complete data were included in the analysis. The pre-FUP and FUP cohorts consisted of 313 patients and 187 patients, respectively. The overall cohort had a mean age (SD) of 70 years (9.3). 66% of the overall cohort were males. The median time to RNU from MDT in the FUP was significantly lower compared to the pre-FUP cohort; 62 days (IQR 59) vs. 48 days (IQR 41.5), p < 0.0001. The median time to RNU from MDT in patients who underwent a diagnostic URS in the FUP cohort was significantly lower compared to the pre-FUP cohort; 78.5 days (IQR 54.8) vs. 68 days (IQR 48), p-NS. The non-UTUC rates in the DUR and non-DUR cohorts were 6/248 (2.4%) and 14/251 (5.6%), respectively (NS).

Conclusion

In this series, we illustrate the effectiveness of integrating a multidisciplinary approach with specialised personnel, ring-fenced clinics, efficient diagnostic assessment and optimised theatre capacity. By adopting a risk-stratified approach to diagnostic ureteroscopy, we have achieved a significant reduction in time to RNU.

Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A (2021) Cancer statistics, 2021. Cancer J Clin 71:7–33. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21654CrossRef

Soria F, Shariat SF, Lerner SP et al (2017) Epidemiology, diagnosis, preoperative evaluation and prognostic assessment of upper-tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). World J Urol 35(3):379–387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-016-1928-xCrossRefPubMed

Almås B, Halvorsen OJ, Johannesen TB, Beisland C (2021) Higher than expected and significantly increasing incidence of upper tract urothelial carcinoma. A population based study. World J Urol 39(9):3385–3391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03576-3CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Aziz A, Raza SJ, Davaro F, May A, Siddiqui S, Hamilton Z (2021) Stage migration for upper tract urothelial cell carcinoma. Clin Genitourin Cancer 19(3):e184–e192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clgc.2020.09.007CrossRefPubMed

Browne BM, Stensland KD, Moynihan MJ, Canes D (2018) An analysis of staging and treatment trends for upper tract urothelial carcinoma in the national cancer database. Clin Genitourin Cancer 16(4):e743–e750. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clgc.2018.01.015CrossRefPubMed

Rai BP, Luis Dominguez Escrig J, Vale L et al (2022) Systematic review of the incidence of and risk factors for urothelial cancers and renal cell carcinoma among patients with haematuria. Eur Urol 82(2):182–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2022.03.027CrossRefPubMed

Rouprêt M, Seisen T, Birtle AJ et al (2023) European Association of Urology Guidelines on upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: 2023 update. Eur Urol 84(1):49–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2023.03.013CrossRefPubMed

Coleman JA, Clark PE, Bixler BR et al (2023) Diagnosis and management of non-metastatic upper tract urothelial carcinoma: AUA/SUO guideline. J Urol 209(6):1071–1081. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003480CrossRefPubMed

Neal RD, Tharmanathan P, France B et al (2015) Is increased time to diagnosis and treatment in symptomatic cancer associated with poorer outcomes? Systematic review. Br J Cancer 112(Suppl 1):S92-107. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2015.48CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Nowak L, Krajewski W, Laszkiewicz J et al (2022) The impact of surgical waiting time on oncological outcomes in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma undergoing radical nephroureterectomy: a systematic review. J Clin Med 11(14):4007. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11144007CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Rodgers M, Nixon J, Hempel S et al (2006) Diagnostic tests and algorithms used in the investigation of haematuria: systematic reviews and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 10(18):iii–iv. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta10180. (xi-259)CrossRefPubMed

12.

van Doeveren T, van der Mark M, van Leeuwen PJ, Boormans JL, Aben KKH (2021) Rising incidence rates and unaltered survival rates for primary upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a Dutch population-based study from 1993 to 2017. BJU Int 128:343–351. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.15389CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Raman JD, Messer J, Sielatycki JA, Hollenbeak CS (2011) Incidence and survival of patients with carcinoma of the ureter and renal pelvis in the USA, 1973–2005. BJU Int 107:1059–1064. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09675.xCrossRefPubMed

14.

Leow JJ, Tan WS, Tan WP et al (2022) UroSoMe Collaborators. A systematic review and meta-analysis on delaying surgery for urothelial carcinoma of bladder and upper tract urothelial carcinoma: implications for the COVID19 pandemic and beyond. Front Surg 9:879774. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.879774CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Farrell C, Molassiotis A, Beaver K, Heaven C (2011) Exploring the scope of oncology specialist nurses’ practice in the UK. Eur J Oncol Nurs 15(2):160–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejon.2010.07.009CrossRefPubMed

16.

Veeratterapillay R, Geraghty R, Pandian R et al (2022) Ten-year survival outcomes after radical nephroureterectomy with a risk-stratified approach using prior diagnostic ureteroscopy: a single-institution observational retrospective cohort study. BJU Int 129(6):744–751. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.15627CrossRefPubMed

17.

Trail M, Rahman MSW, Broadhurst WJ et al (2023) Diagnostic evaluation of upper tract urothelial carcinoma: can we safely omit diagnostic ureteroscopy? BJU Int 131(6):755–762. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.15945CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Focused UTUC pathways with a risk-stratified approach to diagnostic ureteroscopy: is it the need of the hour? A retrospective cohort analysis
verfasst von: Kalpesh Parmar
Mark Hanson
Ahmed S. Mahrous
Francis X. Keeley Jr.
Anthony G. Timoney
Salah Albuheissi
Bhavan Prasad Rai
Joe Philip
Publikationsdatum: 01.12.2024
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: World Journal of Urology / Ausgabe 1/2024
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-023-04734-z

Update Urologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Klimawandel und Gesundheit: Was Sie in der Hausarztpraxis wissen müssen und tun können

Springer Medizin

Focused UTUC pathways with a risk-stratified approach to diagnostic ureteroscopy: is it the need of the hour? A retrospective cohort analysis