| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Bergengren, Oskar, et al.
(författare)
-
Short term outcomes after robot assisted and open cystectomy- A nation-wide population-based study
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Ejso. - : Elsevier BV. - 0748-7983 .- 1532-2157. ; 49:4, s. 868-874
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction: We aimed to compare short term outcomes after robot assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) and open radical cystectomy (ORC) for urinary bladder cancer in a large population.Materials and methods: We included all patients without distant metastases who underwent either RARC or ORC with ileal conduit between 2011 and 2019 registered in the Bladder cancer data Base Sweden (BladderBaSe) 2.0. Primary outcome was unplanned readmissions within 90 days, and secondary out-comes within 90 days of surgery were reoperations, Clavien 3-5 complications, total days alive and out of hospital, and mortality. The analysis was carried out using multivariate regression models.Results: Out of 2905 patients, 832 were operated with RARC and 2073 with ORC. Robotic procedures were to a larger extent performed during later years, at high volume centers (47% vs 17%), more often for organ-confined disease (82% vs. 72%) and more frequently in patients with high socioeconomic status (26% vs. 21%). Patients operated with RARC were more commonly readmitted (29% vs. 25%). In multi -variable analysis RARC was associated with decreased risk of Clavien 3-5 complications (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.47-0.72), reoperations (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.39-0.71) and had more days alive and out of hospital (mean difference 3.7 days, 95% CI 2.4-5.0).Conclusion: This study illustrates the "real-world" effects of a gradual and nation-wide introduction of RARC. Patients operated with RARC had fewer major complications and reoperations but were more frequently readmitted compared to ORC. The observed differences were largely due to more wound related complications among patients treated with ORC.(c) 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
|
|
| 5. |
- Botteri, E., et al.
(författare)
-
Alcohol consumption and risk of urothelial cell bladder cancer in the European prospective investigation into cancer and nutrition cohort
- 2017
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Cancer. - : WILEY. - 0020-7136 .- 1097-0215. ; 141:10, s. 1963-1970
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Findings on the association between alcohol consumption and bladder cancer are inconsistent. We investigated that association in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition cohort. We included 476,160 individuals mostly aged 35-70 years, enrolled in ten countries and followed for 13.9 years on average. Hazard ratios (HR) for developing urothelial cell carcinoma (UCC; 1,802 incident cases) were calculated using Cox proportional hazards models. Alcohol consumption at baseline and over the life course was analyzed, as well as different types of beverages (beer, wine, spirits). Baseline alcohol intake was associated with a statistically nonsignificant increased risk of UCC (HR 1.03; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00-1.06 for each additional 12 g/day). HR in smokers was 1.04 (95% CI 1.01-1.07). Men reporting high baseline intakes of alcohol (>96 g/day) had an increased risk of UCC (HR 1.57; 95% CI 1.03-2.40) compared to those reporting moderate intakes (<6 g/day), but no dose-response relationship emerged. In men, an increased risk of aggressive forms of UCC was observed even at lower doses (>6 to 24 g/day). Average lifelong alcohol intake was not associated with the risk of UCC, however intakes of spirits>24 g/day were associated with an increased risk of UCC in men (1.38; 95% CI 1.01-1.91) and smokers (1.39; 95% CI 1.01-1.92), compared to moderate intakes. We found no association between alcohol and UCC in women and never smokers. In conclusion, we observed some associations between alcohol and UCC in men and in smokers, possibly because of residual confounding by tobacco smoking.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
