TY - JOUR
T1 - Consistencies in Follow-up After Radical Cystectomy for Bladder Cancer
T2 - A Framework Based on Expert Practices Collaboratively Developed by the European Association of Urology Bladder Cancer Guideline Panels
AU - Mertens, Laura S
AU - Bruins, Harman Maxim
AU - Contieri, Roberto
AU - Babjuk, Marek
AU - Rai, Bhavan P
AU - Puig, Albert Carrión
AU - Escrig, Jose Luis Dominguez
AU - Gontero, Paolo
AU - van der Heijden, Antoine G
AU - Liedberg, Fredrik
AU - Martini, Alberto
AU - Masson-Lecomte, Alexandra
AU - Meijer, Richard P
AU - Mostafid, Hugh
AU - Neuzillet, Yann
AU - Pradere, Benjamin
AU - Redlef, John
AU - van Rhijn, Bas W G
AU - Rouanne, Matthieu
AU - Rouprêt, Morgan
AU - Sæbjørnsen, Sæbjørn
AU - Seisen, Thomas
AU - Shariat, Shahrokh F
AU - Soria, Francesco
AU - Soukup, Viktor
AU - Thalmann, George
AU - Xylinas, Evanguelos
AU - Mariappan, Paramananthan
AU - Alfred Witjes, J
N1 - Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2024/6/20
Y1 - 2024/6/20
N2 - BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There is no standardized regimen for follow-up after radical cystectomy (RC) for bladder cancer (BC). To address this gap, we conducted a multicenter study involving urologist members from the European Association of Urology (EAU) bladder cancer guideline panels. Our objective was to identify consistent post-RC follow-up strategies and develop a practice-based framework based on expert opinion.METHODS: We surveyed 27 urologist members of the EAU guideline panels for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer and muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer using a pre-tested questionnaire with dichotomous responses. The survey inquired about follow-up strategies after RC and the use of risk-adapted strategies. Consistency was defined as >75% affirmative responses for follow-up practices commencing 3 mo after RC. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis.KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: We received responses from 96% of the panel members, who provided data from 21 European hospitals. Risk-adapted follow-up is used in 53% of hospitals, with uniform criteria for high-risk (at least ≥pT3 or pN+) and low-risk ([y]pT0/a/1N0) cases. In the absence of agreement for risk-based follow up, a non-risk-adapted framework for follow-up was developed. Higher conformity was observed within the initial 3 yr, followed by a decline in subsequent follow-up. Follow-up was most frequent during the first year, including patient assessments, physical examinations, and laboratory tests. Computed tomography of the chest and abdomen/pelvis was the most common imaging modality, initially at least biannually, and then annually from years 2 to 5. There was a lack of consistency for continuing follow-up beyond 10 yr after RC.CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: This practice-based post-RC follow-up framework developed by EAU bladder cancer experts may serve as a valuable guide for urologists in the absence of prospective randomized studies.PATIENT SUMMARY: We asked urologists from the EAU bladder cancer guideline panels about their patient follow-up after surgical removal of the bladder for bladder cancer. We found that although urologists have varying approaches, there are also common follow-up practices across the panel. We created a practical follow-up framework that could be useful for urologists in their day-to-day practice.
AB - BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There is no standardized regimen for follow-up after radical cystectomy (RC) for bladder cancer (BC). To address this gap, we conducted a multicenter study involving urologist members from the European Association of Urology (EAU) bladder cancer guideline panels. Our objective was to identify consistent post-RC follow-up strategies and develop a practice-based framework based on expert opinion.METHODS: We surveyed 27 urologist members of the EAU guideline panels for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer and muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer using a pre-tested questionnaire with dichotomous responses. The survey inquired about follow-up strategies after RC and the use of risk-adapted strategies. Consistency was defined as >75% affirmative responses for follow-up practices commencing 3 mo after RC. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis.KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: We received responses from 96% of the panel members, who provided data from 21 European hospitals. Risk-adapted follow-up is used in 53% of hospitals, with uniform criteria for high-risk (at least ≥pT3 or pN+) and low-risk ([y]pT0/a/1N0) cases. In the absence of agreement for risk-based follow up, a non-risk-adapted framework for follow-up was developed. Higher conformity was observed within the initial 3 yr, followed by a decline in subsequent follow-up. Follow-up was most frequent during the first year, including patient assessments, physical examinations, and laboratory tests. Computed tomography of the chest and abdomen/pelvis was the most common imaging modality, initially at least biannually, and then annually from years 2 to 5. There was a lack of consistency for continuing follow-up beyond 10 yr after RC.CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: This practice-based post-RC follow-up framework developed by EAU bladder cancer experts may serve as a valuable guide for urologists in the absence of prospective randomized studies.PATIENT SUMMARY: We asked urologists from the EAU bladder cancer guideline panels about their patient follow-up after surgical removal of the bladder for bladder cancer. We found that although urologists have varying approaches, there are also common follow-up practices across the panel. We created a practical follow-up framework that could be useful for urologists in their day-to-day practice.
U2 - 10.1016/j.euo.2024.05.010
DO - 10.1016/j.euo.2024.05.010
M3 - Article
C2 - 38906795
SN - 2588-9311
JO - European Urology Oncology
JF - European Urology Oncology
ER -