Routine Preoperative Bone Scintigraphy Has Limited Impact on the Management of Patients with Invasive Bladder Cancer.


Journal

European urology focus
ISSN: 2405-4569
Titre abrégé: Eur Urol Focus
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101665661

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Sep 2021
Historique:
received: 17 08 2020
revised: 10 09 2020
accepted: 22 09 2020
pubmed: 17 10 2020
medline: 14 4 2022
entrez: 16 10 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

According to current guidelines, bone scintigraphy is not routinely indicated in patients with invasive bladder cancer prior to radical cystectomy unless specific symptoms are present. These guidelines, however, are based on sparse data of low quality. To assess the clinical impact of routine staging bone scintigraphy on further patient management. A retrospective, single-center study of 1287 consecutive patients, who were scheduled to undergo radical cystectomy due to invasive bladder cancer between January 2000 and December 2017, was conducted. All patients were prospectively followed up according to our institutional protocol. Bone scintigraphy as staging imaging prior to radical cystectomy. The primary endpoint was the change in intended patient management. Secondary endpoints were the need for additional imaging, the diagnostic performance of baseline bone scintigraphy, and the association between clinical and radiological findings on bone metastases and survival. Logistic and Cox regression models were used for univariate and multivariate analyses. Of 1287 patients scheduled for radical cystectomy, 1148 (89%) underwent bone scintigraphy as staging imaging. Overall, baseline bone scintigraphy led to a change in the intended management in 19/1148 (1.7%) patients. Additional imaging was performed in 44/1148 (4%) patients. Although positive bone scintigraphy findings were associated with the occurrence/development of bone metastases, the diagnostic performance of baseline bone scintigraphy was generally poor (positive predictive value, negative predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity were 56%, 89%, 27%, and 96%, respectively). Higher clinical tumor stage and the nonperformance of cystectomy had negative impacts on cancer-specific survival and overall survival, while positive bone scintigraphy was associated with worse cancer-specific survival. This study was limited by its retrospective nature and the lack of follow-up bone scintigraphy in all patients. These results demonstrate the limited value of bone scintigraphy in the staging of invasive bladder cancer and do not support its routine use. In this study, we looked at the clinical impact of bone scintigraphy on the diagnostics of patients with invasive bladder cancer. We found that routine staging bone scintigraphy had limited impact on further patient management. We conclude that bone scintigraphy should not be part of routine staging in patients with invasive bladder cancer.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
According to current guidelines, bone scintigraphy is not routinely indicated in patients with invasive bladder cancer prior to radical cystectomy unless specific symptoms are present. These guidelines, however, are based on sparse data of low quality.
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
To assess the clinical impact of routine staging bone scintigraphy on further patient management.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS METHODS
A retrospective, single-center study of 1287 consecutive patients, who were scheduled to undergo radical cystectomy due to invasive bladder cancer between January 2000 and December 2017, was conducted. All patients were prospectively followed up according to our institutional protocol.
INTERVENTION METHODS
Bone scintigraphy as staging imaging prior to radical cystectomy.
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS METHODS
The primary endpoint was the change in intended patient management. Secondary endpoints were the need for additional imaging, the diagnostic performance of baseline bone scintigraphy, and the association between clinical and radiological findings on bone metastases and survival. Logistic and Cox regression models were used for univariate and multivariate analyses.
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS CONCLUSIONS
Of 1287 patients scheduled for radical cystectomy, 1148 (89%) underwent bone scintigraphy as staging imaging. Overall, baseline bone scintigraphy led to a change in the intended management in 19/1148 (1.7%) patients. Additional imaging was performed in 44/1148 (4%) patients. Although positive bone scintigraphy findings were associated with the occurrence/development of bone metastases, the diagnostic performance of baseline bone scintigraphy was generally poor (positive predictive value, negative predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity were 56%, 89%, 27%, and 96%, respectively). Higher clinical tumor stage and the nonperformance of cystectomy had negative impacts on cancer-specific survival and overall survival, while positive bone scintigraphy was associated with worse cancer-specific survival. This study was limited by its retrospective nature and the lack of follow-up bone scintigraphy in all patients.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
These results demonstrate the limited value of bone scintigraphy in the staging of invasive bladder cancer and do not support its routine use.
PATIENT SUMMARY RESULTS
In this study, we looked at the clinical impact of bone scintigraphy on the diagnostics of patients with invasive bladder cancer. We found that routine staging bone scintigraphy had limited impact on further patient management. We conclude that bone scintigraphy should not be part of routine staging in patients with invasive bladder cancer.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33060038
pii: S2405-4569(20)30275-3
doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.09.016
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1052-1060

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Marc A Furrer (MA)

Department of Urology, University Hospital of Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland; Department of Urology, The University of Melbourne, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: marcalain.furrer@outlook.com.

Thomas Grueter (T)

Department of Urology, University Hospital of Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.

Piet Bosshard (P)

Department of Urology, University Hospital of Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland; Department of Urology, University Hospital of Lausanne (CHUV), University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.

Mihai Dorin Vartolomei (MD)

Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Sciences and Technology, Targu Mures, Romania.

Bernhard Kiss (B)

Department of Urology, University Hospital of Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.

George N Thalmann (GN)

Department of Urology, University Hospital of Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.

Beat Roth (B)

Department of Urology, University Hospital of Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland; Department of Urology, University Hospital of Lausanne (CHUV), University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH