Pelvic organ-preserving radical cystectomy versus standard radical cystectomy in female patients diagnosed with bladder cancer

Abstract

BackgroundPelvic organ-preserving radical cystectomy (POPRC) has been reported to result in a better postoperative quality of life in female with bladder cancer compared to standard radical cystectomy (SRC). However, its oncological outcomes remain a concern.Patients and methodsFemale patients with bladder cancer who underwent POPRC or SRC were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of POPRC usage. To avoid the potential impact of baseline differences between groups on survival, a 1:2 propensity score matching (PSM) was implemented. After that, Kaplan-Meier curves and Log-rank tests were used to determine the significance of overall survival (OS) differences between patients in the SRC group and POPRC group. Finally, subgroup analysis based on predetermined indicators was performed.ResultsA total of 2193 patients were included with a median follow-up of 53 months, of whom 233 (10.6%) received POPRC and 1960 (89.4%) received SRC. No definitive predictors of POPRC were identified. Before PSM, POPRC resulted in comparable OS to SRC (HR = 1.09, p = 0.309), while after PSM, POPRC was associated with significantly worse OS (HR = 1.23, p = 0.038). In subgroup analyses, POPRC led to non-inferior OS (HR = 1.18, 95%CI 0.71–1.95, p = 0.531) in patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) and T2 patients (HR = 1.07, p = 0.669), but significantly worse OS in T3 patients (HR = 1.41, p = 0.02).ConclusionCurrently, patients undergoing POPRC have not undergone strict screening, and candidates for POPRC should have more stringent criteria in the future to achieve satisfactory oncological outcomes. However, flaws in the study make more evidence needed to support our findings.