A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Comparison of functional and oncological outcomes between uterus-sparing radical cystectomy and standard radical cystectomy in females: A retrospective study. | LitMetric

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the functional and oncological outcomes of females who underwent uterus-sparing radical cystectomy (USRC) and standard radical cystectomy (SRC).

Materials And Methods: Between February 2009 and December 2020, 90 female patients who underwent radical cystectomy with urinary diversion were included in this study, comprising the USRC and SRC groups. Functional outcomes were assessed in 63 patients who only underwent radical cystectomy with neobladder formation. Questionnaire scores, clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) rate, and urinary continence rate were analyzed. Oncological outcomes were assessed in 86 patients, regardless of the urinary diversion type. Overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were compared.

Results: CIC rate was significantly lower in the USRC group than in the SRC group (14.7% vs. 48.0%; p=0.005). The continence rate was significantly higher in the USRC group than in the SRC group (85.3% vs. 40.0%; p=0.001). There were no significant differences in OS (p=0.890), CSS (p=0.700), or RFS (p=0.270) between the two groups. In multivariate analysis, uterine preservation did not significantly increase the hazard ratio (HR) of OS (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.18-2.11; p=0.450), CSS (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.22-4.40; p=0.990), or RFS (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.19-1.11; p=0.840).

Conclusions: USRC resulted in higher continence rates and lower CIC rates than SRC without negatively affecting oncological outcomes. Hence, with thorough deliberation, USRC should be considered for females undergoing radical cystectomy.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9643730PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.4111/icu.20220220DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

radical cystectomy
28
oncological outcomes
16
functional oncological
8
uterus-sparing radical
8
standard radical
8
patients underwent
8
underwent radical
8
urinary diversion
8
outcomes assessed
8
assessed patients
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!