Home
October 2008 November 2008 December 2008
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
Week 44 1
Week 45 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Week 46 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Week 47 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Week 48 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Week 49 30

Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy for Cancer; Oncologic Outcomes for up to 5 Years - Abstract Show Comments PDF Print E-mail
  
Monday, 24 March 2008

Section of Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery, Glickman Urological Institute, The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH.

To report the oncological outcomes at Between December 1999 and January 2005, 37 patients (mean age 66 years) had LRC with urinary diversion for invasive bladder cancer; 26 patients (70%) also had an extended pelvic lymphadenectomy. Overall and cancer-specific survival data were obtained from patient charts, radiographic reports, telephone contact, and a check of the Social Security Death Index.

Most tumors were transitional cell carcinoma (32, 86%), high-grade (Grade III in 29, 78%) and high-stage (>/= pT2 in 26, 70%). Two patients had a positive surgical margin. The median (range) number of lymph nodes excised was 14 (2-24; seven patients (17%) had node-positive disease (pN1). Follow-up data were available for 35 patients (95%); eight (22%) completed >/= 5 years of follow-up, and the mean (range) follow-up was 31 (1-66) months. At the last follow-up, 24 patients (65%) were alive with no evidence of disease and 11 (30%) were dead, two (5%) from metastasis and nine (24%) from unrelated causes. The 5-year actuarial overall, cancer-specific, and recurrence-free survival was 63%, 92%, and 92%, respectively.

To our knowledge, this is the first report of < /= 5-year follow-up after LRC; the data suggest that LRC provides oncological outcomes comparable to contemporary series of open RC.

Written by
Kane CJ.

Reference
Urol Oncol. 2008 Mar-Apr;26(2):221.
doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2008.01.006

PubMed Abstract
PMID:18312952

UroToday.com Bladder Cancer Section

Reader Comments

Please log-in or register in order to submit comments.

Powered by AkoComment!

 
User Rating: / 0
PoorBest


 
< Prev   Next >