Search

Percutaneous ablation therapy (AT) and partial nephrectomy (PN) are successful management strategies for T1a renal cancer. Our objective was to compare AT to PN with respect to recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS).Patients post-PN or -AT for cT1aN0M0 renal cancer from 2011 to 2021 were identified from the national Canadian Kidney Cancer information system. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using propensity score (PS) was used. The primary outcomes, RFS and OS, were compared using Kaplan-Meier log-rank test analyses and Cox proportional hazard regression models.A total of 275 patients underwent AT and 2,001 underwent PN, with a median followup of 2.0 years (IQR 0.6-4.1). Covariates were well balanced between the AT and PN cohorts following PS matching. Two-year RFS following IPTW PS analysis for patients undergoing AT and PN was 88.1% and 97.4% (p0.0001), respectively, while 2-year OS was 97.4% and 99.0% (p=0.7), respectively. Five-year RFS following IPTW PS analysis for patients undergoing AT and PN was 86.0% and 95.1%, respectively (p=0.003), while 5-year OS was 94.2% and 95.1%, respectively (p=0.9). Following IPTW PS analysis, treatment modality (PN vs AT) was a predictor of disease recurrence (HR 0.36, p=0.003) but not for OS (HR 0.96, p=0.9).With short followup, PN offers better RFS than AT, although no significant difference in OS was detected following PS adjustments. Both modalities can be offered to appropriately selected patients while we await prospective randomized data.

To characterize proportion of patients receiving adrenalectomy, adrenal involvement prevalence and oncologic outcomes of routine adrenalectomy in contemporary practice. Ipsilateral adrenalectomy was once standard during radical nephrectomy. However, benefit of routine adrenalectomy has been questioned because adrenal involvement of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is low.All patients receiving radical nephrectomy in the Canadian Kidney Cancer information system, a collaborative prospective cohort populated by 14 major Canadian centers, between January 2011 to February 2020 were included. Patients were excluded if they had non-RCC histology, multiple tumors, contralateral tumors, metastatic disease or previous history of RCC. Patient demographic, clinical, and surgical information were summarized and compared. Cox-proportional hazards was used for multivariable analysis.During study period, 2759 patients received radical nephrectomy, of these, 831(30.1%) had concomitant adrenalectomy. Pathological adrenal involvement was identified in 102 (3.7%overall; 12.3%of adrenalectomy). Median follow-up was 21.6months (Interquartile range 7.0-46.5). Patients with adrenalectomy had higher venous tumor thrombus (30.3% vs 9.6%; P.0001), higher T stage (71.1% vs 43.4% pT3/4; P.0001), lymph node metastases (17.6% vs 10.7%; P = .0035), Fuhrman grades (71.4% of Fuhrman grades 3/4 vs 56.2%; P.0001) and increased proportion of clear cell histology (79.3% vs 74.5%; P = .0074) compared to the no adrenalectomy group. Adrenalectomy patients had higher risk of recurrence (HR 1.23; 95% CI 1.04-1.47; P = .019) and no difference in survival (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.86-1.38, P = .48).Adrenalectomy is not associated with better oncological outcome of recurrence/survival. Adrenalectomy should be reserved for patients with radiographic adrenal involvement and/or intra-operative adrenal involvement.

Life-prolonging therapies (LPTs) are rapidly evolving for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer, although factors associated with real-world uptake are not well characterized.In this cohort of prostate-cancer decedents, we analyzed factors associated with LPT access. Population-level databases from Ontario, Canada identified patients 65 years or older with prostate cancer receiving androgen deprivation therapy and who died of prostate cancer between 2013 and 2017. Univariate and multivariable analyses assessed the association between baseline characteristics and receipt of LPT in the 2 years prior to death.Of 3575 patients who died of prostate cancer, 40.4% (n = 1443) received LPT, which comprised abiraterone (66.3%), docetaxel (50.3%), enzalutamide (17.2%), radium-223 (10.0%), and/or cabazitaxel (3.5%). Use of LPT increased by year of death (2013: 22.7%, 2014: 31.8%, 2015: 41.8%, 2016: 49.1%, and 2017: 57.9%, p 0.0001), driven by uptake of all agents except docetaxel. Adjusted odds of use were higher for patients seen at Regional Cancer Centers (OR: 1.8, 95% CI: 1.5-2.1) and who received prior prostate-directed therapy (OR: 1.3, 95% CI: 1.0-1.5), but lower with advanced age (≥85: OR: 0.54, 95% CI:0.39-0.75), increased chronic conditions (≥6: OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.43-0.92), and long-term care residency (OR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.17-0.89). Income, stage at presentation, and distance to the cancer center were not associated with LPT uptake.In this cohort of prostate cancer-decedents, real-world uptake of novel prostate cancer therapies occurred at substantially higher rates for patients receiving care at Regional Cancer Centers, reinforcing the potential benefits for treatment access for patients referred to specialist centers.

Introduction: The growing number of surgical options available to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), may overwhelm patients and urologists when deciding on an optimal treatment. Therefore, we developed an online patient decision aid (PtDA) that includes all guideline-approved surgical modalities. The objective of this study was to assess the acceptability of the PtDA among former BPH surgery patients and urologists that treat BPH surgically. Methods: The International Patient Decision Aids Standards were used to develop a PtDA that includes monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), bipolar TURP, GreenLight photovaporization, endoscopic enucleation of the prostate, Rezum, Urolift, Aquablation, open retropubic prostatectomy, and robotic simple prostatectomy as management options. Eleven urologists that regularly treat BPH and 19 patients who received BPH surgery were recruited. Alpha-testing was performed using a validated acceptability scoring system. Results: For all sections of the PtDA, most urologists agreed that the language used was easy to follow (91.9%), that the amount of information provided was adequate (63.6%), that the length of the PtDA was appropriate (63.6%), and that the outcomes reported were correct (81.8%). All 19 patient participants agreed that the language used was easy to follow, and most found that the amount of information provided was adequate (84.2%), that the length of the PtDA was appropriate (84.2%), and that the outcomes reported were well-explained (89.5%). Conclusions: Our PtDA was found to be acceptable among urologists and patients. These results demonstrate that most of the participants either recommend the use of this tool or plan to incorporate it in their clinical practice.

Oncologic, urinary, and sexual outcomes are important to patients receiving prostate cancer surgery. The objective of this study was to determine if providing surgical report cards (SuReps) to surgeons resulted in improved patient outcomes.A prospective before-and-after study was conducted at The Ottawa Hospital. A total of 422 consecutive patients undergoing radical prostatectomy were enrolled. The intervention was provision of report cards to surgeons. The control cohort was patients treated before report card feedback (pre-SuRep), and the intervention cohort was patients treated after report card feedback (post-SuRep). The primary outcomes were postoperative erectile function, urinary continence, and positive surgical margins.Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Almost all patients (99%) were continent and the majority (59%) were potent prior to surgery. Complete 1-year followup was available for 400 patients (95%). Nerve sparing surgery increased from 70% pre-SuRep to 82% post-SuRep (p=0.01). There was a nonstatistically significant increase in the proportion of patients with a positive surgical margin post-SuRep (31% pre-SuRep vs 39% post-SuRep, p=0.08). There was no difference in postoperative erectile function (17% vs 18%, p=0.7) and a decrease in continence (75% vs 65%, p=0.02) at 1 year postoperatively.The SuRep platform allows accurate reporting of surgical outcomes that can be used for patient counseling. However, the provision of surgical report cards did not improve functional or oncologic outcomes. Longer durations of feedback, report card modifications, or targeted interventions are likely necessary to improve outcomes.

Objective: To evaluate the role of incomplete metastasectomy (IM) for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) on overall survival (OS) and time to introduction of first-line systemic therapy. Methodology: Patients diagnosed with mRCC between Jan 2011 and Apr 2019 in 16 centers were selected from the Canadian Kidney Cancer information system database. We included mRCC patients who had prior nephrectomy and had received an IM (resection of at least 1 metastasis) or no metastasectomy (NM). A propensity score matching was performed to minimize selection bias. Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to assess the impact of the metastasectomy while adjusting for potential confounders. OS was assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: A total of 138 patients with mRCC underwent IM, while 1221 patients did not. On multivariate analysis, IM did not improve OS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.96, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.45, P = 0.836) However, subgroup analyses revealed IM improved OS compared with NM when lungs were the only site involved (median time to OS not reached versus 66 months, respectively; P = 0.014). Additionally, lung metastasectomy delayed the systemic therapy compared with NM (median 41 and 13 months, respectively, P = 0.014). IM of endocrine organs (thyroid, pancreas, adrenals) or bone metastases did not impact OS. Conclusion: The role of IM for mRCC is limited. Incomplete resection of lung metastases was associated with improved OS and delayed time to introduction of systemic therapy when lungs were the sole location of metastatic disease. Despite case-matching, unknown unadjusted confounders may explain the relationship between IM and survival in this analysis.

Purpose:The time between radiographic identification of a renal tumor and surgery can be concerning for patients and clinicians due to fears of tumor progression while awaiting treatment. This stud...

Background Frailty is associated with early postoperative outcomes. How frailty influences long-term postoperative recovery is poorly described. Our objective was to evaluate the association of frailty with postoperative disability trajectories in the year after surgery. Methods Prespecified 1-yr follow-up of a prospective multicentre cohort study. Patients ≥65 yr were assessed for frailty before major elective noncardiac surgery (Clinical Frailty Scale [CFS] and Fried Phenotype [FP]). The primary outcome was patient-reported disability score (using the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0) at baseline, 30, 90, and 365 days after surgery. Repeated measures linear regression estimated the association of preoperative frailty with changes in disability scores over time, adjusted for procedure. Group-based trajectory modelling was used to identify subgroup trajectories of people with frailty. Results One-year follow-up was complete for 687/702 (97.9%) participants. Frailty was associated with a significant difference in disability trajectory (P Conclusions Decision-making and care planning should integrate the possible trade-offs between early adverse outcomes with longer-term benefit when frailty is present in older surgical patients.

Patients want personalized information before surgery; most do not receive personalized risk estimates. Inadequate information contributes to poor experience and medicolegal complaints. We hypothesized that exposure to the Personalized Risk Evaluation and Decision Making in Preoperative Clinical Assessment (PREDICT) app, a personalized risk communication tool, would improve patient knowledge and satisfaction after anesthesiology consultations compared with standard care. We conducted a prospective clinical study (before-after design) and used patient-reported data to calculate personalized risks of morbidity, mortality, and expected length of stay using a locally calibrated National Surgical Quality Improvement Program risk calculator embedded in the PREDICT app. In the standard care (before) phase, the application’s materials and output were not available to participants; in the PREDICT app (after) phase, personalized risks were communicated. Our primary outcome was knowledge score after the anesthesiology consultation. Secondary outcomes included patient satisfaction, anxiety, feasibility, and acceptability. We included 183 participants (90 before; 93 after). Compared with standard care phase, the PREDICT app phase had higher post-consultation: knowledge of risks (14.3% higher; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.5 to 22.0; P < 0.001) and satisfaction (0.8 points; 95% CI, 0.1 to 1.4; P = 0.03). Anxiety was unchanged (− 1.9%; 95% CI, − 4.2 to 0.5; P = 0.13). Acceptability was high for patients and anesthesiologists. Exposure to a patient-facing, personalized risk communication app improved knowledge of personalized risk and increased satisfaction for adults before elective inpatient surgery. www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03422133); registered 5 February 2018.

To evaluate the ability of unenhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to detect metastatic lymphadenopathy in men with stage 1 testicular cancer on surveillance. With IRB approval, we identified 23 consecutive men with stage 1 testicular cancer (diagnosed after orchiectomy) undergoing surveillance with unenhanced MRI of the abdomen and pelvis. Three blinded radiologists (2 inexperienced R1/R2 and 1 experienced R3) independently assessed MRI for: presence, location and size of abnormal lymph nodes and degree of confidence (5-point Likert scale) in diagnosis. Diagnostic accuracy was tabulated and compared between groups using ROC. Inter-observer agreement was assessed using Cohen’s kappa statistic. 17.4% (4/23) men developed 6 metastatic lymph nodes (reference standard: interval development from baseline, size > 1.0 cm short axis). R1 and R2 detected 75% (3/4) patients with abnormal lymph nodes, compared to R3 who detected all four cases. False positive interpretations occurred in: 5.2% (1/19) R1, 10.5% (2/19) R2 and no patients for R3. Sensitivity, specificity and area under the ROC curve (AUC) were: R1: 75% (95% CI 19.4–99.4%), 94.7% (74.0–99.9%) and 0.85 (0.59–1.00), R2: 75% (19.4–99.4%), 89.5% (66.9–98.7%) and 0.82 (0.57–1.00) and, R3: 100% (95% 39.8–100.0%), 100% (82.4–100%) and 1.00 (1.00–1.00) with no difference in AUC between readers (p = 0.383). Comparison in accuracy between readers is limited due to the small sample size. Inter-observer agreement was substantial (K = 0.62). Median (range) degree of confidence scores were rated: R1 5 (5–5), R2 4 (3–5) and, R3 5 (5–5). In this study, unenhanced MRI was adequate for surveillance of stage 1 testicular cancer; however, radiologist inexperience may lead to errors.

Introduction: Patients with advanced bladder cancer receiving chemotherapy have a high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE); however, we hypothesized these patients are not routinely offered thromboprophylaxis. The objective of this study was to characterize practice patterns and perceptions of Canadian urologic and medical oncologists, and to identify research needs regarding thromboprophylaxis for patients with bladder cancer. Methods: An online survey was distributed to Canadian urologic and medical oncologists who manage advanced bladder cancer. The survey explored physician opinions regarding VTE rates, risk stratification scores, thromboprophylaxis use in different treatment settings, and interest in clinical trials. Results: Seventy physicians were invited and 36 (51%) completed the survey, including 20 (56%) urologic oncologists and 16 (44%) medical oncologists. Most respondents (35; 97%) believed that exposure to platinum chemotherapy increases VTE risk. For patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 34 (94%) respondents estimated the risk of VTE to be 10% or higher, yet 25 (69%) indicated they do not routinely recommend thromboprophylaxis. Physicians frequently (10; 40%) defer the decision to another physician, while eight (32%) believe there is not enough evidence to guide best management. Similar responses were obtained for metastatic patients. Almost all (94%) respondents were interested in participating in a thromboprophylaxis trial for patients with bladder cancer. Conclusions: Patients with bladder cancer receiving chemotherapy in Canada are not routinely offered thromboprophylaxis. We found strong interest among Canadian oncologists to participate in clinical trials examining this topic.

Frailty is a state of vulnerability as a result of decreased reserves. Prehabilitation may increase reserve and improve postoperative outcomes. Our objective was to determine if home-based prehabilitation improves postoperative functional recovery in older adults with frailty having cancer surgery.This double blind randomised trial enrolled people ≥60 yr having elective cancer surgery and ≥3 weeks from enrolment to surgery as eligible. Participation in a remotely supported, home-based exercise prehabilitation program plus nutritional guidance was compared with standard care plus written advice on age-appropriate activity and nutrition. The primary outcome was 6-min walk test (6MWT) distance at the first postoperative clinic visit. Secondary outcomes included physical performance, quality of life, disability, length of stay, non-home discharge, and 30-day readmission.Of 543 patients assessed, 254 were eligible and 204 (80%) were randomised (102 per arm); 182 (94 intervention and 88 control) had surgery and were analysed. Mean age was 74 yr and 57% were female. Mean duration of participation was 5 weeks, mean adherence was 61% (range 0%-100%). We found no significant difference in 6MWT at follow-up (+14 m, 95% confidence interval -26-55 m, P=0.486), or for secondary outcomes. Analyses using a prespecified adherence definition of ≥80% supported improvements in 6MWT distance, complication count, and disability.A home-based prehabilitation program did not significantly improve postoperative recovery or other outcomes in older adults with frailty having cancer surgery. Program adherence may be a key mediator of prehabilitation efficacy.NCT02934230.

Preoperative frailty assessment is recommended by multiple practice guidelines and may improve outcomes, but it is not routinely performed. The barriers and facilitators of routine preoperative frailty assessment have not been formally assessed. Our objective was to perform a theory-guided evaluation of barriers and facilitators to preoperative frailty assessment.This was a research ethics board-approved qualitative study involving physicians who perform preoperative assessment (consultant and resident anesthesiologists and consultant surgeons). Semistructured interviews were conducted by a trained research assistant informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework to identify barriers and facilitators to frailty assessment. Interview transcripts were independently coded by two research assistants to identify specific beliefs relevant to each theoretical domain.We interviewed 28 clinicians (nine consultant anesthesiologists, nine consultant surgeons, and ten anesthesiology residents). Six domains (Knowledge [100%], Social Influences [96%], Social Professional Role and Identity [96%], Beliefs about Capabilities [93%], Goals [93%], and Intentions [93%]) were identified by90% of respondents. The most common barriers identified were prioritization of other aspects of assessment (e.g., cardio/respiratory) and a lack of awareness of evidence and guidelines supporting frailty assessment. The most common facilitators were a high degree of familiarity with frailty, recognition of the importance of frailty assessment, and strong intentions to perform frailty assessment.Barriers and facilitators to preoperative frailty assessment are multidimensional, but generally consistent across different types of perioperative physicians. Knowledge of barriers and facilitators can guide development of evidence-based strategies to increase frailty assessment.RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: L’évaluation préopératoire de la fragilité est recommandée par plusieurs lignes directrices de pratique et pourrait améliorer les devenirs, mais elle n’est pas systématiquement réalisée. Les obstacles et les facilitateurs de l’évaluation de routine de la fragilité préopératoire n’ont pas été officiellement évalués. Notre objectif était de mener une évaluation théorique des obstacles et des facilitateurs de l’évaluation préopératoire de la fragilité. MéTHODE: Il s’agissait d’une étude qualitative approuvée par le comité d’éthique de la recherche impliquant des médecins menant des évaluations préopératoires (anesthésiologistes, résidents en anesthésiologie et chirurgiens). Des entrevues semi-structurées ont été réalisées par un assistant de recherche formé en se fondant sur le Cadre des domaines théoriques afin d’identifier les obstacles et les facilitateurs à l’évaluation de la fragilité. Les transcriptions des entrevues ont été codées de manière indépendante par deux assistants de recherche afin d’identifier les croyances spécifiques pertinentes à chaque domaine théorique. RéSULTATS: Nous avons interrogé 28 cliniciens (neuf anesthésiologistes, neuf chirurgiens et dix résidents en anesthésiologie). Six domaines (Connaissances [100 %], Influences sociales [96 %], Rôle et identité socio-professionnels [96 %], Croyances concernant les capacités [93 %], Objectifs [93 %] et Intentions [93 %]) ont été identifiés par90 % des répondants. Les obstacles les plus fréquemment cités étaient la priorisation accordée à d’autres aspects de l’évaluation (p. ex., cardio/respiratoire) et le manque de connaissances des données probantes et des lignes directrices à l’appui de l’évaluation de la fragilité. Les facilitateurs les plus courants étaient un degré élevé de familiarité avec la fragilité, la reconnaissance de l’importance de l’évaluation de la fragilité et de fortes intentions de réaliser une évaluation de la fragilité. CONCLUSION: Les obstacles et les facilitateurs de l’évaluation préopératoire de la fragilité sont multidimensionnels, mais généralement uniformes parmi les différents types de médecins périopératoires. La connaissance des obstacles et des facilitateurs peut guider l’élaboration de stratégies fondées sur des données probantes pour augmenter l’évaluation de la fragilité.

Background Thromboprophylaxis aims to reduce venous thromboembolism but has the potential to increase bleeding. We sought to evaluate the risk of venous thromboembolism and transfusion after major abdominopelvic procedures and to quantify the association of the procedure with venous thromboembolism. Methods The American College of Surgeons’ National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was queried for patients who received an abdominopelvic surgery between 2005 and 2016. Patient factors, operative factors, and outcomes were collected. Multivariable analyses were used to determine the association between individual procedures and venous thromboembolism. Area under the curve analyses were performed to assess whether addition of the procedure to Caprini score improved the association of the model with venous thromboembolism. The primary outcome was risk of venous thromboembolism within 30 days of surgery. Secondary outcomes were the risk of transfusion within 30 days and the association between operative time with venous thromboembolism. Results There were 896,441 patients who received an abdominopelvic procedure. The overall risk of venous thromboembolism was 1.9% (n = 16,665). Procedures with the highest risk of venous thromboembolism were esophagectomy (5.5%) and partial esophagectomy (5.3%). The overall risk of transfusion was 9.5% (n = 84,889). Procedures with the highest risk of transfusion were pelvic exenteration (53.6%) and radical cystectomy (37.7%). On multivariable analyses, individual procedures were independently associated with venous thromboembolism, despite adjusting for Caprini score. Area under the curve analyses indicated risk prediction of the baseline model (area under the curve 0.59) improved when procedures were added (area under the curve 0.68). Conclusion Patients undergoing abdominopelvic surgery are at a high risk of venous thromboembolism and transfusion. Improved risk stratification may be possible by including more procedural information in scoring systems.

ObjectiveAdministrative data systems are used to identify hospital-based patient safety events; few studies evaluate their accuracy. We assessed the accuracy of a new set of patient safety indicators (PSIs; designed to identify in hospital complications).Study designProspectively defined analysis of registry data (1 April 2010–29 February 2016) in a Canadian hospital network. Assignment of complications was by two methods independently. The National Surgical Quality Improvement Programme (NSQIP) database was the clinical reference standard (primary outcome=any in-hospital NSQIP complication); PSI clusters were assigned using International Classification of Disease (ICD-10) codes in the discharge abstract. Our primary analysis assessed the accuracy of any PSI condition compared with any complication in the NSQIP; secondary analysis evaluated accuracy of complication-specific PSIs.PatientsAll inpatient surgical cases captured in NSQIP data.AnalysisWe assessed the accuracy of PSIs (with NSQIP as reference standard) using positive and negative predictive values (PPV/NPV), as well as positive and negative likelihood ratios (±LR).ResultsWe identified 12 898 linked episodes of care. Complications were identified by PSIs and NSQIP in 2415 (18.7%) and 2885 (22.4%) episodes, respectively. The presence of any PSI code had a PPV of 0.55 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.57) and NPV of 0.93 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.93); +LR 6.41 (95% CI 6.01 to 6.84) and −LR 0.40 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.42). Subgroup analyses (by surgery type and urgency) showed similar performance. Complication-specific PSIs had high NPVs (95% CI 0.92 to 0.99), but low to moderate PPVs (0.13–0.61).ConclusionValidation of the ICD-10 PSI system suggests applicability as a first screening step, integrated with data from other sources, to produce an adverse event detection pathway that informs learning healthcare systems. However, accuracy was insufficient to directly identify or rule out individual-level complications.

Most patients diagnosed with a small renal mass (SRM) are treated with definitive treatments such as surgery or thermal ablation. Given that some SRMs are benign or have low metastatic potential, active surveillance seeks to reduce the overtreatment and the potential complications. Active surveillance is an alternative that is being increasingly considered. Active surveillance has already been shown to be effective, but there is a current knowledge gap regarding patients' perceptions of active surveillance and factors influencing their decision.To describe patients' perceptions of active surveillance of SRMs and to identify factors influencing those perceptions.This multicenter descriptive qualitative study recruited patients diagnosed with a renal mass from three institutions, using purposeful sampling. Data were collected using focus group discussions, which were recorded and transcribed. A mixed thematic analysis was performed.Six focus group discussions were conducted with a total of 24 participants. Participants perceived active surveillance as an option to avoid definitive treatments and their potential risks. Active surveillance was, however, perceived to be a temporary solution that would affect their chance of survival and their quality of life. Seven factors were documented as influencing patients' perceptions of active surveillance, the most important being their physician's recommendation.Perceptions of patients with SRMs toward active surveillance varies among individuals. The development of more patient-oriented information tools is needed to educate patients, to reduce physician influence on the decision-making process and to ensure that the patients' decision reflects their own values and preferences.

Surrogate endpoints have the potential to expedite results from clinical trials. However, a surrogate endpoint may not always be a patient-important outcome. Surrogate endpoints must be validated to ensure that they do not expose patients to unnecessary treatment-related toxicity.

Introduction: This quality improvement study examined if a video-based resource could reduce delayed discharges after robotic prostatectomy while maintaining high levels of patient satisfaction. Methods: From April 2018 to February 2020, all patients undergoing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) were asked to complete an anonymous survey evaluating their perioperative experience. The quality improvement (QI) intervention started in March 2019 with a series of six educational videos being shown to all patients. The videos were used to supplement postoperative instruction. The discharge times of all patients were obtained from The Ottawa Hospital Data Repositories. A run chart analysis was used to detect change in discharge time (outcome measure). Patient satisfaction (balancing measure) was analyzed using Chi-squared analysis and descriptive statistics. Results: A total of 425 robotic prostatectomies (199 pre-intervention, 226 post-intervention) were available. Analysis of the run chart revealed non-random change favoring earlier discharge in the intervention group (p

Introduction: Infections are common after radical cystectomy. The objective of this study was to determine the association between antimicrobial prophylactic regimen and infection after radical cystectomy. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed on patients who underwent radical cystectomy at one tertiary Canadian center between January 2016 and April 2020. Patients received antimicrobial prophylaxis based on surgeon preference (cefazolin/metronidazole or ampicillin/ciprofloxacin/metronidazole or other). A univariable and multivariable logistic regression model was created to determine the association between antimicrobial regimen and postoperative infection within 30 days. The association between patient demographic factors, as well as preoperative and intraoperative variables and infection was also determined. Infection characteristics, including type, timing, and antimicrobial susceptibilities were reported. Results: One hundred and sixty-five patients were included. Mean age was 69.8 years, 121 (73.3%) were male, and 72 (43.6%) received orthotopic neobladder diversion. Ninety-six patients (58%) received cefazolin/metronidazole prophylaxis, 50 (30%) received ampicillin/ciprofloxacin/metronidazole, and 19 (11.5%) received another regimen. Fifty-four patients (32.7%) developed a postoperative infection (surgical site infection or urinary tract infection). Surgical site infection occurred in 35 patients (21.2%) and urinary tract infection occurred in 34 (21.0%). There was no association between antimicrobial regimen and incidence of postoperative infection (surgical site infection or urinary tract infection, relative risk [RR] 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50–1.99). Conclusions: The overall incidence of infection was 32.7% following radical cystectomy. The preoperative prophylactic antibiotic regimen used was not associated with incidence of postoperative infection.

Introduction: Rapid progress in diagnostics and therapeutics for the management of prostate cancer (PCa) have created areas where high-level evidence to guide practice is lacking. The Genitourinary Research Consortium (GURC) conducted its second Canadian consensus forum to address areas of controversy in the management of PCa and provide recommendations to guide treatment. Methods: A panel of PCa specialists discussed topics related to the management of PCa. The core scientific committee finalized the design, questions and the analysis of the consensus results. Attendees then voted to indicate their management choice regarding each statement/topic. Questions for voting were adapted from the 2019 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference. The thresholds for agreement were set at ≥ 75% for ‘consensus agreement’, > 50% for “near-consensus”, and ≤ 50% for “no consensus”. Results: The panel was comprised of 29 PCa experts including urologists (n=12), medical oncologists (n= 12), and radiation oncologists (n= 5). Voting took place for 65 pre-determined questions and three ad hoc questions. Consensus was reached for 34 questions, spanning a variety of areas including biochemical recurrence, treatment of metastatic castration-sensitive PCa, management of non-metastatic and metastatic castration-resistant PCa, bone health, and molecular profiling. Conclusions: The consensus forum identified areas of consensus or near-consensus in more than half of the questions discussed. Areas of consensus typically aligned with available evidence, and areas of variability may indicate a lack of high-quality evidence and point to future opportunities for further research and education.

Introduction: Previous reports indicate urologic surgeries are associated with high rates of hospital re-admission. This study aims to identify factors associated with emergency room (ER) encounters following urologic outpatient surgery. Methods: All outpatient surgeries performed at The Ottawa Hospital between April 1, 2008, and March 31, 2018 by urology, general surgery, gynecology, and thoracic surgery were identified. All ER encounters within 90 days of surgery were captured. Rates of ER encounters by surgical service and procedure type were determined. Patient and surgical factors associated with ER encounters were identified. Factors included age, sex, marital status, presence of primary care provider, procedure, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score. Results: A total of 38 377 outpatient surgeries by the included surgical services were performed during the study period, of which urology performed 16 552 (43.1%). Overall, 5641 (14.7%) ER encounters were identified within 90 days of surgery, including 2681 (47.5%) after urologic surgery. On multivariable analysis, higher ASA score IV vs. I was associated with higher risk of ER encounter (relative risk [RR] 1.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.46–2.5) and being married was associated with a lower risk of ER encounter (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77–0.93). Urologic surgeries with the highest risk of ER encounters, compared to the lowest risk procedure (circumcision), were greenlight laser photo vaporization of the prostate (PVP) (RR 3.2, 95% CI 1.8–5.61), ureteroscopy (RR 3.2, 95% CI 1.9–5.4), and ureteric stent insertion (RR 3.1, 95% CI 1.8–5.5). Conclusions: ER encounters following outpatient surgery are common. This study identifies risk factors to recognize patients that may benefit from additional support to reduce ER care needs.

Background Perioperative thromboprophylaxis guidelines offer conflicting recommendations on when to start thromboprophylaxis. As a result, there is considerable variation in clinical practice, which can lead to worse patient outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between the start time of perioperative thromboprophylaxis with venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding outcomes. Study Design Embase, Medline, and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) databases were searched on October 23, 2020. Randomized controlled trials that evaluated VTE and/or bleeding among groups receiving the initial dose of pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis at different times preoperatively, intraoperatively, or postoperatively were included. Only trials that randomized patients to the same medication among groups were eligible. Studies on any type of operation were included. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. The Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool was used. The review was registered with PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; CRD42019142079). The outcomes of interest were VTE and bleeding. Prespecified subgroup analyses of studies including orthopaedic and nonorthopaedic operations were performed. Results A total of 22 trials (n = 17,124 patients) met eligibility criteria. Pooled results showed a nonstatistically significant decrease in the rate of VTE with preoperative initiation of thromboprophylaxis compared with postoperative initiation (risk ratio 0.77; 95% CI, 0.55 to 1.08; I2 = 0%, n = 1,933). There was also a nonstatistically significant increase in the rate of bleeding with preoperative compared with postoperative initiation (risk ratio 1.17; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.46; I2 = 35%, n = 2,752). Risk of bias was moderate. Heterogeneity between studies was low (I2 = 0% to 35%). Conclusions This meta-analysis found a nonstatistically significant decrease in the rate of VTE and an increase in the rate of bleeding when thromboprophylaxis was initiated preoperatively compared with postoperatively.

Introduction: Approximately 50% of patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer are treated with radical prostatectomy. While some men will be cured with surgery alone, a substantial proportion will experience cancer recurrence. Androgen-directed therapy (ADT) is an effective adjuvant therapy for patients treated with prostate radiation. Comparatively, the efficacy of ADT in surgical patients has not been well studied. Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception to July 2020 was performed. Randomized trials comparing ADT with radical prostatectomy vs. prostatectomy alone in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer were included. Neoadjuvant ADT and adjuvant ADT interventions were assessed separately. The primary outcomes were cancer recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). Pathologic outcomes following neoadjuvant ADT were also evaluated. Results: Fifteen randomized trials met eligibility criteria; 11 evaluated neoadjuvant ADT (n=2322) and four evaluated adjuvant ADT (n=5205). Neoadjuvant ADT (three months of treatment) did not improve RFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74–1.11) or OS (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.62–2.41). Neoadjuvant ADT significantly decreased the risk of positive surgical margins (relative risk [RR] 0.48, 95% CI 0.41–0.56) and extraprostatic tumor extension (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.64–0.89). Adjuvant ADT improved RFS (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.45–0.93) but did not improve OS (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.84–1.24). Conclusions: Neoadjuvant ADT causes a pathologic downstaging of prostate tumors, but has not been found to delay cancer recurrence nor extend survival. Few studies evaluated adjuvant ADT. Trials are needed to determine the benefits and harms of intermediate or long-term adjuvant ADT for radical prostatectomy patients.

Background: Surgeons induce renal hypothermia during partial nephrectomy to preserve kidney function, without strong evidence of benefit. This trial examined the effectiveness and safety of renal hypothermia during partial nephrectomy. Methods: We conducted a parallel randomized controlled trial of hypothermia versus no hypothermia (control group) during partial nephrectomy at six academic hospitals. Eligible patients had a planned open partial nephrectomy for the treatment of a renal tumor. During surgery, after clamping the renal hilum, patients were randomized to the intervention or control arm in a 1:1 ratio using permuted blocks of variable lengths (2 and 4), stratified by institution, using a computer-based program. Surgeons and study coordinators were masked to treatment allocation until the renal hilum was clamped. Overall glomerular filtration rates were determined before, and 1-year after, surgery. The primary outcome was measured glomerular filtration rate (mGFR) assessed by the plasma clearance of 99mTc-DTPA. The trial (NCT01529658) was designed with 90% power to detect a minimal clinically important difference in mGFR of 10ml/min/1.73m2 at a 5% significance level. Findings: Of the 184 patients randomized, hypothermia and control patients had similar baseline mean mGFR (87.1 vs 81.0 ml/min/1.73m2). One hundred and sixty-one (79 hypothermia, 82 control) were alive with primary outcome data 1-year after surgery. The change in mGFR 1-year after surgery was -6.6 ml/min/1.73m2 in the hypothermia group and -7.8 mL/min/1.73m2 in the control group (mean difference 1.2 mL/min/1.73m2, 95% CI -3.3 to 5.6). Operated-kidney change in mGFR was similar between groups (-5.8 vs -6.3 mL/min/1.73m2; mean difference 0.5 mL/min/1.73m2, 95% CI -2.9 to 3.8). No clinically significant difference in the mGFR was observed when patients were stratified by pre-planned subgroups. Renal hypothermia did not impact the secondary outcomes of surgical complications and patient reported quality of life. Interpretation: Renal hypothermia during partial nephrectomy does not preserve kidney function in patients with normal or mildly impaired renal function.

INTRODUCTION: The Canadian Kidney Cancer information system (CKCis) has prospectively collected data on patients with renal tumors since January 1, 2011 from 16 sites within 14 academic centers in six provinces. Canadian kidney cancer experts have used CKCis data to address several research questions. The goal of this study was to determine if the CKCis cohort is representative of the entire Canadian kidney cancer population, specifically regarding demographic and geographic distributions. METHODS: The CKCis prospective cohort was analyzed up to December 31, 2018. Baseline demographics and tumor characteristics were analyzed, including location of patients’ residence at the time of CKCis entry. Geographic data is presented by province, rural vs. urban via postal code information (2(nd) digit=0) and by Canadian urban boundary files. To determine the proportion of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients that CKCis captures, CKCis accruals were compared to projected Canadian Cancer Society RCC incidence in 2016–2017 and the incidence from the 2016 Canadian Cancer Registry. To determine if the CKCis baseline data is representative, it was compared to registry data and other published data when registry data was not available. RESULTS: This CKCis cohort includes 10 298 eligible patients: 66.6% male, median age 62.6 years; 14.6% had metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis and 70.4% had clear-cell carcinomas. The CKCis cohort captures about 1250 patients per year, which represents approximately 20% of the total kidney cancer incidence. The proportion of patients captured per province did vary from 13–43%. Rural patients make up 17% of patients, with some baseline differences between rural and urban patients. There appears to be no major differences between CKCis patient demographics and disease characteristics compared to national data sources. Canadian heat maps detailing patient location are presented. CONCLUSIONS: CKCis contains prospective data on >10 000 Canadian kidney cancer patients, making it a valuable resource for kidney cancer research. The baseline demographic and geographic data do appear to include a broad cross-section of patients and seem to be highly representative of the Canadian kidney cancer population. Moving forward, future projects will include determining if CKCis cancer outcomes are also representative of the entire Canadian kidney cancer population and studying variations across provinces and within rural vs. urban areas.

When used during surgery, antifibrinolytic hemostatic agents such as lysine analogues are effective at reducing blood loss and the need for transfusions. Despite proven efficacy, use of hemostatic agents remains low during some surgeries. Our objective was to explore surgeon opinions about, and use of lysine analogues in, oncologic surgeries at a large tertiary care academic institution. We administered a survey to surgeons who perform high-transfusion-risk oncologic surgeries at a large academic hospital in Ottawa, Ontario. Design and distribution of the survey followed a modified Dillman method. To ensure that the survey questionnaire was relevant, clear, and concise, we performed informant interviews, cognitive interviews, and pilot-testing. The final survey consisted of 19 questions divided into 3 sections: respondent demographics, use of hemostatic agents, and potential clinical trial opinions. Of 28 surgeons, 24 (86%) participated. When asked to indicate the frequency of lysine analogue use, &ldquo, never&rdquo, accounted for 46% of the responses, and &ldquo, rarely&rdquo, (, unfamiliar with benefits&rdquo, and &ldquo, prefer alternatives.&rdquo, Fifteen surgeons (63%) felt that a trial was needed to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of lysine analogues in their cancer field. Our survey found that lysine analogues are infrequently used during oncologic surgeries at our institution. Many surgeons are unfamiliar with the benefits and side effects of lysine analogues and, alternatively, use topical hemostatic agents. Our results demonstrate that future trials exploring the efficacy and safety of lysine analogues in oncologic surgery are needed.

There is inadequate high-quality evidence on thromboprophylaxis for patients undergoing surgery for abdominopelvic cancer. We surveyed physicians who treat patients with abdominopelvic cancer to determine current thromboprophylaxis practice patterns and to determine where research is needed.We created an online survey with questions on thromboprophylaxis topics, including type of thromboprophylaxis used, timing of initial thromboprophylaxis dose, use of thromboprophylaxis during chemotherapy, use of extended-duration thromboprophylaxis and areas for future research. The survey questions were reviewed by external content experts to ensure they were appropriate and relevant. Surgeons, thrombosis experts and medical oncologists who manage patients with abdominopelvic cancers at 1 large Canadian academic centre were invited to complete the survey between January and April 2019.Of the 57 physicians invited, 42 (74%) completed the survey, including 27 surgeons (response rate 79%), 9 thrombosis experts (response rate 75%) and 6 medical oncologists (response rate 55%). Most surgeons (22 [82%]) reported using mechanical thromboprophylaxis, whereas only 1 thrombosis expert (11%) recommended mechanical thromboprophylaxis. There was substantial variability in the timing of the initial dose of thromboprophylaxis, with 9/10 urologists (90%) and all 7 general surgeons giving the first dose intraoperatively, and three-quarters of thoracic surgeons (3/4 [75%]), gynecologists (3/4 [75%]) and thrombosis experts (7/9 [78%]) starting thromboprophylaxis after surgery. All medical oncologists believed chemotherapy increases the risk of venous thromboembolism, but 4 (67%) reported that they do not routinely prescribe thromboprophylaxis owing to bleeding concerns. Most respondents (35/38 [92%]) felt there was a need for more research on thromboprophylaxis and indicated willingness to participate in future clinical trials.Variability exists in contemporary thromboprophylaxis practice patterns among physicians treating patients with abdominopelvic cancer. Future research is needed to standardize care and improve outcomes for patients.On manque de données de qualité élevée sur la thromboprophylaxie chez les patients traités en chirurgie pour un cancer abdomino-pelvien. Nous avons sondé des médecins traitant ces patients afin de déterminer les tendances actuelles relatives à cette pratique et pour cerner les besoins en recherche.Nous avons créé un sondage en ligne sur la thromboprophylaxie, comprenant des questions sur le type utilisé, le moment d’administration de la dose initiale, le recours durant la chimiothérapie, l’utilisation prolongée et les domaines de recherche à explorer. Les questions ont été validées par des experts de contenu externes, qui ont veillé à ce qu’elles soient appropriées et pertinentes. Des chirurgiens, des experts en thrombose et des oncologues qui s’occupent de patients atteints de cancers abdomino-pelviens dans un grand centre hospitalier universitaire canadien ont été invités à remplir le sondage entrer janvier et avril 2019.Des 57 médecins sollicités, 42 (74%) ont répondu au sondage, dont 27 chirurgiens (taux de réponse de 79%), 9 experts en thrombose (taux de réponse de 75 %) et 6 oncologues (taux de réponse de 55 %). La majorité des chirurgiens (22 [82 %]) recouraient à la thromboprophylaxie mécanique, alors qu’un seul expert en thrombose (11 %) recommandait cette pratique. Le moment d’administration de la dose initiale variait considérablement: 9 urologues sur 10 (90%) et chacun des 7 chirurgiens généralistes administraient la première dose durant l’opération, alors que les trois quarts des chirurgiens thoraciques (3/4 [75%]), des gynécologues (3/4 [75%]) et des experts en thrombose (7/9 [78%]) commençaient la thromboprophylaxie après l’intervention. Tous les oncologues étaient d’avis que la chimiothérapie augmentait le risque de thromboembolie veineuse, mais 4 (67%) ont indiqué qu’ils ne prescrivaient pas d’emblée de thromboprophylaxie en raison des risques de saignements. La plupart des répondants (35/38 [92%]) considéraient qu’il faudrait étudier davantage la thromboprophylaxie et ont indiqué leur volonté de participer à d’éventuels essais cliniques.À l’heure actuelle, les pratiques liées à la thromboprophylaxie varient chez les médecins traitant des patients atteints de cancers abdomino-pelviens. Il faudra mener d’autres études pour normaliser la prestation des soins et améliorer les résultats pour les patients.

Introduction: Across all cancer sites and stages, prostate cancer has one of the greatest median five-year survival rates, highlighting the important focus on survivorship issues following diagnosis and treatment. In the current study, we sought to evaluate the prevalence and predictors of depression in a large, multicenter, contemporary, prospectively collected sample of men with prostate cancer. Methods: Data from the current study were drawn from the baseline visit of men enrolled in the RADICAL PC study. Men with a new diagnosis of prostate cancer or patients initiating androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer for the first time were recruited. Depressive symptoms were evaluated using the nine-item version of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). To evaluate factors associated with depression, a multivariable logistic regression model was constructed, including biological, psychological, and social predictor variables. Results: Data from 2445 patients were analyzed. Of these, 201 (8.2%) endorsed clinically significant depression. Younger age (odds ratio [OR] 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16–1.60 per 10-year decrease), being a current smoker (OR 2.77; 95% CI 1.66–4.58), former alcohol use (OR 2.63; 95% CI 1.33–5.20), poorer performance status (OR 5.01; 95% CI 3.49–7.20), having a pre-existing clinical diagnosis of depression or anxiety (OR 3.64; 95% CI 2.42–5.48), and having high-risk prostate cancer (OR 1.49; 95% CI 1.05–2.12) all conferred independent risk for depression. Conclusions: Clinically significant depression is common in men with prostate cancer. Depression risk is associated with a host of biopsychosocial variables. Clinicians should be vigilant to screen for depression in those patients with poor social determinants of health, concomitant disability, and advanced disease.

Introduction: Shared decision-making incorporates patient’s values and preferences to achieve high-quality decisions. The objective of this study was to develop an acceptable patient decision aid to facilitate shared decision-making for the management of small renal masses (SRMs). Methods: The International Patient Decision Aids Standards were used to guide an evidence-based development process. Management options included active surveillance, thermal ablation, partial nephrectomy, and radical nephrectomy. A literature review was performed to provide incidence rates for outcomes of each option. Once a prototype was complete, alpha-testing was performed using a 10-question survey to assess acceptability with patients, patient advocates, urologists, and methodological experts. The primary outcome was acceptability of the decision aid. Results: A novel patient decision aid was created to facilitate shared decision-making for the management of SRMs. Acceptability testing was performed with 20 patients, 10 urologists, two patient advocates, and one methodological expert. Responders indicated the decision aid was appropriate in length (82%, 27 of 33), well-balanced (82%, 27 of 33), and had language that was easy to follow (94%, 31 of 33). All patient responders felt the decision aid would have been helpful during their consultation and would recommend the decision aid for future patients (100%, 20 of 20). Most urologists reported they intend to use the decision aid (90%, 9 of 10). Conclusions: A novel patient decision aid was created to facilitate shared decision-making for management of SRMs. This clinical tool was acceptable with patients, patient advocates, and urologists and is freely available at: https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/decaids.html.

INTRODUCTION: The Canadian Kidney Cancer information system (CKCis) has prospectively collected data on patients with renal tumors since Jan 1st, 2011 from 16 sites within 14 academic centers in 6 provinces. Canadian kidney cancer experts have used CKCis data to address several research questions. The goal of this study was to determine if the CKCis cohort is representative of the entire Canadian kidney cancer population, specifically regarding demographic and geographic distributions. METHODS: The CKCis prospective cohort was analyzed up to Dec 31, 2018. Baseline demographics and tumor characteristics were analyzed including location of patients’ residence at the time of CKCis entry. Geographic data is presented by province, rural versus urban via postal code info (2nd digit=0) and by Canadian urban boundary files. To determine the proportion of RCC patients that CKCis captures, CKCis accruals were compared to projected Canadian Cancer Society RCC incidence in 2016-2017 and the incidence from the 2016 Canadian Cancer Registry. To determine if the CKCis baseline data is representative it was compared to Registry data and other published data when Registry data was not available. RESULTS: This CKCis cohort includes 10,298 eligible patients: 66.6% male, median age 62.6 years, 14.6% had metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis and 70.4% had clear cell carcinomas. The CKCis cohort captures about 1,250 patients per year, which represents approximately 20% of the total kidney cancer incidence. The proportion of patients captured per province did vary from 13% to 43%. Rural patients make up 17% of patients with some baseline differences between rural and urban patients. There appears to be no major differences between CKCis patient demographics and disease characteristics compared to national data sources. Canadian heat maps detailing patient location are presented. CONCLUSIONS: CKCis contains prospective data on >10,000 Canadian kidney cancer patients making it a valuable resource for kidney cancer research. The baseline demographic and geographic data do appear to include a broad cross section of patients and seem to be highly representative of the Canadian kidney cancer population. Moving forward, future projects will include determining if CKCis cancer outcomes are also representative of the entire Canadian kidney cancer population, and studying variations across provinces and within rural versus urban areas.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE:Urologic surgeries have been previously identified as having high rates of readmission compared to other surgeries. This study aims to identify risk factors leading to pr...