Prognostic significance of tumor location and superficial urothelial bladder carcinoma history in patients with ureteral urothelial carcinoma treated with radical nephroureterectomy

Jian-Ye Liu,Qun Zhang,Yun-Lin Ye,Jing Li,Wei Chen,Yong-Hong Li,Zhi-Ling Zhang,Kai Yao,Li-Juan Jiang,Hui Han,Zhou-Wei Liu,Zi-Ke Qin,Fang-Jian Zhou
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-013-0398-y
IF: 2.2662
2013-01-01
International Urology and Nephrology
Abstract:Purpose To investigate the significance of tumor location and superficial urothelial bladder carcinoma (UBC) history on oncological outcomes in patients treated with radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) for ureteral urothelial carcinoma (UC). Methods One hundred and thirty-two patients treated with RNU for ureteral UC between January 1999 and July 2010 were retrospectively analyzed. Recurrence probabilities and survival rates were analyzed, stratified by tumor location and superficial UBC history. Results Comparison of patients with proximal, middle, and distal ureteral UC showed that percentage of bladder recurrence was 13.3, 14.7, and 25.0 %, respectively ( P = 0.285); retroperitoneal (tumor bed or lymph node) recurrence was 26.7, 14.7, and 27.9 % ( P = 0.319); and contralateral recurrence was 0, 2.9, and 0 % ( P = 0.234). Comparison of patients with and without history of superficial UBC revealed that percentage of bladder recurrence was 15.4 and 20.2 %, respectively ( P = 0.681); retroperitoneal recurrence was 15.4 and 25.2 % ( P = 0.433); and contralateral recurrence was 0 and 0.84 % ( P = 0.740). Using multivariable Cox regression analyses, there were no significant differences of recurrence-free survival (RFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) with regard to neither tumor location nor superficial UBC history (RFS: P = 0.282 and 0.762, CSS: P = 0.272 and 0.818, respectively). Conclusions Tumor location and history of superficial UBC could not be used to predict oncological outcomes of patients who underwent RNU for ureteral UC. Therefore, operative strategies or postoperative surveillance should not be affected by tumor location or history of superficial UBC.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?