Background: Standardized methods for reporting surgical quality have been described for all the major urological procedures apart from radical nephroureterectomy (RNU). Objective: To propose a tetrafecta criterion for assessing the quality of RNU based on a consensus panel within the Young Association of Urology (YAU) Urothelial Group, and to test the impact of this tetrafecta in a multicenter, large contemporary cohort of patients treated with RNU for upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). Design, setting, and participants: This was a retrospective analysis of 1765 patients with UTUC treated between 2000 and 2021. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: We interviewed the YAU Urothelial Group to propose and score a list of items to be included in the "RNUfecta. "A ranking was generated for the criteria with the highest sum score. These criteria were applied to a large multicenter cohort of patients. Kaplan Meier curves were built to evaluate differences in overall survival (OS) rates between groups, and a multivariable logistic regression model was used to find the predictors of achieving the RNU tetrafecta. Results and limitations: The criteria with the highest score included three surgical items such as negative soft tissue surgical margins, bladder cuff excision, lymph node dissection according to guideline recommendations, and one oncological item defined by the absence of any recurrence in < 12 mo. These items formed the RNU tetrafecta. Within a median follow-up of 30 mo, 52.6% of patients achieved the RNU tetrafecta. The 5-yr OS rates were significantly higher for patients achieving tetrafecta than for their counterparts (76% vs 51%). Younger age, lower body mass index, and robotic approach were found to be independent predictors of tetrafecta achievement. Conversely, a higher Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score, higher clinical stage, and bladder cancer history were inversely associated with tetrafecta. Conclusions: Herein, we present a "tetrafecta "composite endpoint that may serve as a potential tool to assess the overall quality of the RNU procedure. Pending external validation, this tool could allow a comparison between surgical series and may be useful for assessing the learning curve of the procedure as well as for evaluating the impact of new technologies in the field. Patient summary: In this study, a tetrafecta criterion was developed for assessing the surgical quality of radical nephroureterectomy in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Patients who achieved tetrafecta had higher 5-yr overall survival rates than those who did not.

Radical Nephroureterectomy Tetrafecta: A Proposal Reporting Surgical Strategy Quality at Surgery

Liguori, G;
2022

Abstract

Background: Standardized methods for reporting surgical quality have been described for all the major urological procedures apart from radical nephroureterectomy (RNU). Objective: To propose a tetrafecta criterion for assessing the quality of RNU based on a consensus panel within the Young Association of Urology (YAU) Urothelial Group, and to test the impact of this tetrafecta in a multicenter, large contemporary cohort of patients treated with RNU for upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). Design, setting, and participants: This was a retrospective analysis of 1765 patients with UTUC treated between 2000 and 2021. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: We interviewed the YAU Urothelial Group to propose and score a list of items to be included in the "RNUfecta. "A ranking was generated for the criteria with the highest sum score. These criteria were applied to a large multicenter cohort of patients. Kaplan Meier curves were built to evaluate differences in overall survival (OS) rates between groups, and a multivariable logistic regression model was used to find the predictors of achieving the RNU tetrafecta. Results and limitations: The criteria with the highest score included three surgical items such as negative soft tissue surgical margins, bladder cuff excision, lymph node dissection according to guideline recommendations, and one oncological item defined by the absence of any recurrence in < 12 mo. These items formed the RNU tetrafecta. Within a median follow-up of 30 mo, 52.6% of patients achieved the RNU tetrafecta. The 5-yr OS rates were significantly higher for patients achieving tetrafecta than for their counterparts (76% vs 51%). Younger age, lower body mass index, and robotic approach were found to be independent predictors of tetrafecta achievement. Conversely, a higher Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score, higher clinical stage, and bladder cancer history were inversely associated with tetrafecta. Conclusions: Herein, we present a "tetrafecta "composite endpoint that may serve as a potential tool to assess the overall quality of the RNU procedure. Pending external validation, this tool could allow a comparison between surgical series and may be useful for assessing the learning curve of the procedure as well as for evaluating the impact of new technologies in the field. Patient summary: In this study, a tetrafecta criterion was developed for assessing the surgical quality of radical nephroureterectomy in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Patients who achieved tetrafecta had higher 5-yr overall survival rates than those who did not.
Pubblicato
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666168322006218
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9334825/
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
NUT TETRAFACTA.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Documento in Versione Editoriale
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 433.34 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
433.34 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
1-s2.0-S2666168322006218-mmc1.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: Supplementary table
Tipologia: Altro materiale allegato
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 32.19 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
32.19 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11368/3028692
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact