The role of metastatic burden in cytoreductive/consolidative radical cystectomy.

PURPOSE: To describe our institutional experience with cytoreductive/consolidative radical cystectomy (CCRC) for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) and to investigate clinicopathologic features predicting prolonged cancer specific survival (CSS) following CCRC. METHODS: We performed IRB-approved review of our cystectomy database, and identified 43 patients with metastatic UC who underwent CCRC. Baseline demographics, chemotherapy regimen, clinicopathologic features, and perioperative complications were collected. Progression-free survival (PFS) and CSS were estimated from the time of CCRC. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression models were used to identify predictors of improved CSS after CCRC. RESULTS: Of the 43 patients, 32 (74.4%) had clinical evidence of distant metastases, while 11 harbored occult metastases on the surgical specimen. The most common site of metastasis was the retroperitoneal lymph nodes, found in 30 patients. Solitary metastases were found in 22 patients (51.1%). Forty-one (95%) patients received chemotherapy prior to CCRC. Disease progression was detected in 35 patients after CCRC (median PFS 5.9 months), and 34 died of metastatic cancer (median CSS 12.3 months). On multivariate analysis, patients with solitary metastases were found to have improved CSS compared to those with multiple metastases (HR 2.62, 95% CI 1.16-5.90, p = 0.02), with median CSS of 26.0 months vs. 7.9 months (p < 0.001). Median postoperative length of stay was 10 days. Overall, 56% suffered postoperative complications, including one perioperative mortality. CONCLUSIONS: CCRC is feasible in the setting of metastatic UC. Patients with solitary metastasis demonstrated longer CSS than those with multiple metastases, and should be considered candidates for future trials evaluating the role of CCRC for metastatic UC.

Perioperative venous thromboembolism in urologic oncology procedures, risk factors, and prevention.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication during the perioperative period for major urologic oncology operations. The present review focuses on the risk factors, the mechanisms of hypercoagulability in this patient population, and the timing and prevention of VTE. RECENT FINDINGS: Although the vast majority of patients undergoing major urologic oncology operations do not develop VTEs, when they do develop they can be fatal. The risk factors for VTEs are important to identify in this patient population. The timing of VTE events are also essential to understanding their prevention. Prevention focused around the perioperative period is the best way to reduce fatal complications secondary to a VTE event. SUMMARY: VTEs are common and can potentially be fatal. Prevention in high-risk patients during the most vulnerable perioperative time period should be the focus of clinical efforts to reduce VTE complications and the associated morbidity and mortality.

Effectiveness and safety of extended-duration prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in major urologic oncology surgery.

PURPOSE: To examine the association between extended-duration prophylaxis (EDP), low-molecular-weight heparin prophylaxis for 28 days after surgery for urologic cancer in patients at high risk of developing a venous thromboembolism (VTE), the risk of VTE, and the complications resulting from VTE prophylaxis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The cohort included 332 patients at high risk for VTE who were surgically treated for urologic cancer from June 2011 to June 2014. Adherence to VTE prophylaxis protocol, VTEs, and complications within 365 days from surgery were tracked. Patients were grouped as follows: (1) per protocol in-hospital prophylaxis with EDP (n = 107), (2) per protocol in-hospital prophylaxis without EDP (n = 42), (3) not per protocol in-hospital prophylaxis with EDP (n = 83), and (4) not per protocol in-hospital prophylaxis without EDP (n = 100). The risk of VTE was compared between the 4 groups using the Cox model, with adjustment for baseline risk factors. RESULTS: The rates of VTEs and median times to VTE were 7% and 58 days in group 1, 17% and 44 days in group 2, 17% and 46 days in group 3, and 21% and 15 days in group 4, respectively. Adjusted hazard ratios (HR) for VTE were HR = 0.27 (95% CI: 0.11-0.70) for groups 1 vs. 4; HR = 0.66 (95% CI: 0.25-1.60) for groups 2 vs. 4; and HR = 0.66 (95% CI: 0.29-1.26) for groups 3 vs. 4 with a trend of P = 0.002. The incidence of complications from VTE prophylaxis was not significantly different between the groups, with a rate of 8% in group 1, 17% in group 2, 6% in group 3, and 12% in group 4 (P = 0.33). CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk urologic cancer surgery patients, a clinical protocol, with perioperative and EDP, is safe and effective in reducing VTE events.