Search

Item does not contain fulltext, CONTEXT: Overall, 4-10% of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) present with venous tumour thrombus. It is uncertain which surgical technique is best for these patients. Appraisal of outcomes with differing techniques would guide practice. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review relevant literature comparing the outcomes of different surgical therapies and approaches in treating vena caval thrombus (VCT) from nonmetastatic RCC. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Relevant databases (Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library) were searched to identify relevant comparative studies. Risk of bias and confounding assessments were performed. A narrative synthesis of the evidence was presented. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The literature search identified 824 articles. Fourteen studies reporting on 2262 patients were included. No distinct surgical method was superior for the excision of VCT, although the method appeared to be dependent on tumour thrombus level. Minimal access techniques appeared to have better perioperative and recovery outcomes than traditional median sternotomy, but the impact on oncologic outcomes is unknown. Preoperative renal artery embolisation did not offer any oncologic benefits and instead resulted in significantly worse perioperative and recovery outcomes, including possibly higher perioperative mortality. The comparison of cardiopulmonary bypass versus no cardiopulmonary bypass showed no differences in oncologic outcomes. Overall, there were high risks of bias and confounding. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence base, although derived from retrospective case series and complemented by expert opinion, suggests that patients with nonmetastatic RCC and VCT and acceptable performance status should be considered for surgical intervention. Despite a robust review, the findings were associated with uncertainty due to the poor quality of primary studies available. The most efficacious surgical technique remains unclear. PATIENT SUMMARY: We examined the literature on the benefits of sur

Item does not contain fulltext, CONTEXT: The role of percutaneous renal tumour biopsy (RTB) remains controversial due to uncertainties regarding its diagnostic accuracy and safety. OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the safety and accuracy of percutaneous RTB for the diagnosis of malignancy, histologic tumour subtype, and grade. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies providing data on diagnostic accuracy and complications of percutaneous core biopsy (CB) or fine-needle aspiration (FNA) of renal tumours. A meta-analysis was performed to obtain pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity for diagnosis of malignancy. The Cohen kappa coefficient (kappa) was estimated for the analysis of histotype/grade concordance between diagnosis on RTB and surgical specimen. Risk of bias assessment was performed (QUADAS-2). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 57 studies recruiting 5228 patients were included. The overall median diagnostic rate of RTB was 92%. The sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic CBs and FNAs were 99.1% and 99.7%, and 93.2% and 89.8%, respectively. A good (kappa=0.683) and a fair (kappa=0.34) agreement were observed between histologic subtype and Fuhrman grade on RTB and surgical specimen, respectively. A very low rate of Clavien >/=2 complications was reported. Study limitations included selection and differential-verification bias. CONCLUSIONS: RTB is safe and has a high diagnostic yield in experienced centres. Both CB and FNA have good accuracy for the diagnosis of malignancy and histologic subtype, with better performance for CB. The accuracy for Fuhrman grade is fair. Overall, the quality of the evidence was moderate. Prospective cohort studies recruiting consecutive patients and using homogeneous reference standards are required. PATIENT SUMMARY: We systematically reviewed the literature to assess the safety and diagnostic performance of renal tumour biopsy (RTB). The results suggest that RTB has goo

Item does not contain fulltext, CONTEXT: The European Association of Urology Guideline Panel for Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) has prepared evidence-based guidelines and recommendations for RCC management. OBJECTIVES: To provide an update of the 2010 RCC guideline based on a standardised methodology that is robust, transparent, reproducible, and reliable. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: For the 2014 update, the panel prioritised the following topics: percutaneous biopsy of renal masses, treatment of localised RCC (including surgical and nonsurgical management), lymph node dissection, management of venous thrombus, systemic therapy, and local treatment of metastases, for which evidence synthesis was undertaken based on systematic reviews adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Relevant databases (Medline, Cochrane Library, trial registries, conference proceedings) were searched (January 2000 to November 2013) including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective or controlled studies with a comparator arm. Risk of bias (RoB) assessment and qualitative and quantitative synthesis of the evidence were performed. The remaining sections of the document were updated following a structured literature assessment. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: All chapters of the RCC guideline were updated. For the various systematic reviews, the search identified a total of 10,862 articles. A total of 151 studies reporting on 78,792 patients were eligible for inclusion; where applicable, data from RCTs were included and meta-analyses were performed. For RCTs, there was low RoB across studies; however, clinical and methodological heterogeneity prevented data pooling for most studies. The majority of studies included were retrospective with matched or unmatched cohorts based on single or multi-institutional data or national registries. The exception was for systemic treatment of metastatic RCC, in which several RCTs have been performed, resulting in recommendations based on high

1 augustus 2012, Item does not contain fulltext

1 september 2012, Item does not contain fulltext, CONTEXT: New data regarding treatment of muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer (MiM-BC) has emerged and led to an update of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines for MiM-BC. OBJECTIVE: To review the new EAU guidelines for MiM-BC with a specific focus on treatment. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: New literature published since the last update of the EAU guidelines in 2008 was obtained from Medline, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and reference lists in publications and review articles and comprehensively screened by a group of urologists, oncologists, and a radiologist appointed by the EAU Guidelines Office. Previous recommendations based on the older literature on this subject were also taken into account. Levels of evidence (LEs) and grades of recommendations (GRs) were added based on a system modified from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Current data demonstrate that neoadjuvant chemotherapy in conjunction with radical cystectomy (RC) is recommended in certain constellations of MiM-BC. RC remains the basic treatment of choice in localised invasive disease for both sexes. An attempt has been made to define the extent of surgery under standard conditions in both sexes. An orthotopic bladder substitute should be offered to both male and female patients lacking any contraindications, such as no tumour at the level of urethral dissection. In contrast to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, current advice recommends the use of adjuvant chemotherapy only within clinical trials. Multimodality bladder-preserving treatment in localised disease is currently regarded only as an alternative in selected, well-informed, and compliant patients for whom cystectomy is not considered for medical or personal reasons. In metastatic disease, the first-line treatment for patients fit enough to sustain cisplatin remains cisplatin-containing combination chemotherapy. With the advent of vinflunine, second-line chemotherap

Contains fulltext : 96482.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), CONTEXT: New data regarding treatment of muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer (MiM-BC) has emerged and led to an update of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines for MiM-BC. OBJECTIVE: To review the new EAU guidelines for MiM-BC with a specific focus on treatment. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: New literature published since the last update of the EAU guidelines in 2008 was obtained from Medline, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and reference lists in publications and review articles and comprehensively screened by a group of urologists, oncologists, and a radiologist appointed by the EAU Guidelines Office. Previous recommendations based on the older literature on this subject were also taken into account. Levels of evidence (LEs) and grades of recommendations (GRs) were added based on a system modified from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Current data demonstrate that neoadjuvant chemotherapy in conjunction with radical cystectomy (RC) is recommended in certain constellations of MiM-BC. RC remains the basic treatment of choice in localised invasive disease for both sexes. An attempt has been made to define the extent of surgery under standard conditions in both sexes. An orthotopic bladder substitute should be offered to both male and female patients lacking any contraindications, such as no tumour at the level of urethral dissection. In contrast to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, current advice recommends the use of adjuvant chemotherapy only within clinical trials. Multimodality bladder-preserving treatment in localised disease is currently regarded only as an alternative in selected, well-informed, and compliant patients for whom cystectomy is not considered for medical or personal reasons. In metastatic disease, the first-line treatment for patients fit enough to sustain cisplatin remains cisplatin-containing combination chemotherapy. With the advent of vinflunine, second-line chemotherap

1 september 2010, Item does not contain fulltext, CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVES: The European Association of Urology Guideline Group for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has prepared these guidelines to help clinicians assess the current evidence-based management of RCC and to incorporate the present recommendations into daily clinical practice. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The recommendations provided in the current updated guidelines are based on a thorough review of available RCC guidelines and review articles combined with a systematic literature search using Medline and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A number of recent prospective randomised studies concerning RCC are now available with a high level of evidence, whereas earlier publications were based on retrospective analyses, including some larger multicentre validation studies, meta-analyses, and well-designed controlled studies. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines contain information for the treatment of an individual patient according to a current standardised general approach. Updated recommendations concerning diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up can improve the clinical handling of patients with RCC.

Contains fulltext : 81147.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), CONTEXT: New data regarding diagnosis and treatment of muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer (MiM-BC) has emerged and led to an update of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines for MiM-BC. OBJECTIVE: To review the new EAU guidelines for MiM-BC. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A comprehensive workup of the literature obtained from Medline, the Cochrane central register of systematic reviews, and reference lists in publications and review articles was developed and screened by a group of urologists, oncologists, and radiologist appointed by the EAU Guideline Committee. Previous recommendations based on the older literature on this subject were taken into account. Levels of evidence and grade of guideline recommendations were added, modified from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The diagnosis of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (BCa) is made by transurethral resection (TUR) and following histopathologic evaluation. Patients with confirmed muscle-invasive BCa should be staged by computed tomography (CT) scans of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis, if available. Adjuvant chemotherapy is currently only advised within clinical trials. Radical cystectomy (RC) is the treatment of choice for both sexes, and lymph node dissection should be an integral part of cystectomy. An orthotopic bladder substitute should be offered to both male and female patients lacking any contraindications, such as no tumour at the level of urethral dissection. Multimodality bladder-preserving treatment in localised disease is currently regarded only as an alternative in selected, well-informed, and compliant patients for whom cystectomy is not considered for clinical or personal reasons. An appropriate schedule for disease monitoring should be based on (1) natural timing of recurrence, (2) probability of disease recurrence, (3) functional deterioration at particular sites, and (4) consideration of treatment of a recurrence. In metastatic dis

Item does not contain fulltext, OBJECTIVES: The first consensus report that had been presented by the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus Group (EGCCCG) in 2004 has found widespread approval by many colleagues throughout the world. In November 2006, the group met a second time under the auspices of the Department of Urology of the Amsterdam Medical Center, The Netherlands. METHODS: Medical oncologists, urologic surgeons, radiation oncologists as well as pathologists from several European countries reviewed and discussed the data that had emerged since the 2002 conference and incorporated the new data into updated and revised guidelines. As for the first meeting the methodology of evidence-based medicine (EBM) was applied. The results of the discussion were compiled by the writing committee. All participants have agreed to this final update. RESULTS: The second part of the consensus paper includes the treatment of metastasised disease, residual tumour resection, salvage therapy, follow-up, and late toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas the vast majority of the recommendations made in 2004 remain valid 3 yr later, refinements in the treatment of early-stage as well as of advanced-stage testicular cancer have emerged from clinical trials. Despite technical improvements, expert clinical skills will continue to be one of the major determinants for the prognosis of patients with germ cell cancer. In addition, the particular needs of testicular cancer survivors have been acknowledged.

Item does not contain fulltext, OBJECTIVES: The European Association of Urology (EAU) Guideline Group for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) prepared this guideline to help urologists assess the evidence-based management of RCC and to incorporate the guideline recommendations into their clinical practice. METHODS: The recommendations provided in the current guideline are based on a systematic literature search using MedLine, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and publications and review articles. RESULTS: A limited number of prospective randomised studies are available with high-level evidence. Most publications concerning RCC are based on retrospective analyses, including some larger multicentre validation studies and well-designed controlled studies. CONCLUSIONS: It must be stressed that the current guideline contains information for the treatment of an individual patient according to a standardised general approach. Updated recommendations concerning diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up can improve the clinical handling of patients with RCC.