The impact of bladder cuff excision on outcomes after nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: An analysis of the ROBUUST 2.0 registry.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine whether bladder cuff excision and its technique influence outcomes after radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) for upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A multicenter, international, retrospective analysis using the ROBotic surgery for Upper tract Urothelial cancer Study (ROBUUST) 2.0 registry identified 1,718 patients undergoing RNU for UTUC between 2015 and 2023 at 17 centers across the United States, Europe, and Asia. Data was gathered on (1) whether bladder cuff excision was performed and (2) what technique was used, including formal excision or other techniques (pluck technique, stripping/intussusception technique) and outcomes. Multivariate and survival analyses were performed to compare the groups. RESULTS: Most patients (90%, 1,540/1,718) underwent formal bladder cuff excision in accordance with EAU and AUA guidelines. Only 4% (68/1,718) underwent resection using other techniques, and 6% (110/1,718) did not have a bladder cuff excised. Median follow up for the cohort was 24 months (IQR 9-44). When comparing formal bladder cuff excision to other excision techniques, there were no differences in oncologic or survival outcomes including bladder recurrence-free survival (BRFS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), overall survival (OS), or cancer-specific survival (CSS). However, excision of any kind conferred a decreased risk of bladder-specific recurrence compared to no excision. There was no difference in RFS, MFS, OS, or CSS when comparing bladder cuff excision, other techniques, and no excision. CONCLUSIONS: Bladder cuff excision improves recurrence-free survival, particularly when considering bladder recurrence. This benefit is conferred regardless of technique, as long as the intramural ureter and ureteral orifice are excised. However, the benefit of bladder cuff excision on metastasis-free, overall, and cancer-specific survival is unclear.

Robotic distal ureterectomy for high-risk distal ureteral urothelial carcinoma: a retrospective multicenter comparative analysis (ROBUUST 2.0 collaborative group).

BACKGROUND: The role of kidney-sparing surgery in patients with high-risk upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma is controversial. The present study aimed to assess oncological and functional outcomes of robot-assisted distal ureterectomy in patients with high-risk distal ureteral tumors. METHODS: The ROBUUST 2.0 multicenter international (2015-2022) dataset was used for this retrospective cohort analysis. High-risk patients with distal ureteral tumors were divided based on type of surgery: robot-assisted distal ureterectomy or robot-assisted nephroureterectomy. A survival analysis was performed for local recurrence-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and overall survival. After adjusting for clinical features of the high-risk prognostic group, Cox proportional hazard model was plotted to evaluate significant predictors of time-to-event outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, 477 patients were retrieved, of which 58 received robot-assisted distal ureterectomy and 419 robot-assisted nephroureterectomy, respectively, with a mean (±SD) follow-up of 29.6 months (±2.6). The two groups were comparable in terms of baseline features. At survival analysis, no significant difference was observed in terms of recurrence-free survival (P=0.6), metastasis-free survival (P=0.5) and overall survival (P=0.7) between robot-assisted distal ureterectomy and robot-assisted nephroureterectomy. At Cox regression analysis, type of surgery was never a significant predictor of worse oncological outcomes. At last follow-up patients undergoing robot-assisted distal ureterectomy had significantly better postoperative renal function. CONCLUSIONS: Comparable outcomes in terms of recurrence-free survival, metastasis-free survival, and overall survival between robot-assisted distal ureterectomy and robot-assisted nephroureterectomy patients, and better postoperative renal function preservation in the former group were observed. Kidney-sparing surgery should be considered as a potential option for selected patients with high-risk distal ureteral UTUC.

Decisional and prognostic impact of diagnostic ureteroscopy in high-risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma: A multi-institutional collaborative analysis (ROBUUST collaborative group).

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic ureteroscopy (URS) with or without biopsy remains a subject of contention in the management of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), with varying recommendations across different guidelines. The study aims to analyse the decision-making and prognostic role of diagnostic ureteroscopy (URS) in high-risk UTUC patients undergoing curative surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective multi-institutional analysis of high-risk UTUC patients from the ROBUUST dataset, a comparison between patients who received or not preoperative URS and biopsy before curative surgery was carried out. Logistic regression analysis evaluated differences between patients receiving URS and its impact on treatment strategy. Survival analysis included 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS). After adjusting for high-risk prognostic group features, Cox proportional hazard model estimated significant predictors of time-to-event outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, 1,912 patients were included, 1,035 with preoperative URS and biopsy and 877 without. Median follow-up: 24 months. Robot-assisted radical nephroureterectomy was the most common procedure (55.1%), in both subgroups. The 5-year OS (P = 0.04) and CSS (P < 0.001) were significantly higher for patients undergoing URS. The 5-year RFS (P = 0.6), and MFS (P = 0.3) were comparable between the 2 groups. Preoperative URS and biopsy were neither a significant predictor of worse oncological outcomes nor of a specific treatment modality. CONCLUSIONS: The advantage in terms of OS and CSS in patients undergoing preoperative URS could derive from a better selection of candidates for curative treatment. The treatment strategy is likely more influenced by tumor features than by URS findings.