ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2017
Risks and benefits of pelvic lymphadenectomy in octogenarians undergoing radical cystectomy due to urothelial carcinoma of the bladder.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Extended versus standard lymph node dissection for urothelial carcinoma of the bladder in people undergoing radical cystectomy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Radical cystectomy mortality in older patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BJU international · 2025Pooled it
- Extended versus standard lymph node dissection for urothelial carcinoma of the bladder in patients undergoing radical cystectomy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Survival outcomes with pelvic node dissection after partial cystectomy among octogenarians with muscle-invasive bladder cancer.The Canadian journal of urology · 2025Article
- Review
- Article
- Review
- Laparoscopic radical cystectomy in octogenarians: analysis of a Japanese multicenter cohort.International journal of clinical oncology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAccording to current guidelines, radical cystectomy (RC) should be combined with an extended pelvic lymphadenectomy (PLND) as therapeutic and staging instrument. Objective of this study was to analyze the influence of PLND on survival rates and complication rates in a selected group of elderly patients with a minimum age of 80 years. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this single-center retrospective analysis, we evaluated 102 patients who underwent RC due to UCB from 2004 to 2015 at our institution. In 74 patients (73%), RC was combined with PLND; in 28 cases (27%), RC was performed without PLND. Impact of PLND on cancer specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) was analyzed using log-rank test and COX regression model.
resultsIn univariate analysis of the data, we were not able to show a significant impact of PLND on CSS (p = 0.606), OS (p = 0.979) or PFS (p = 0.883). Also in multivariate analysis of the data, we were not able to identify PLND as an independent prognostic parameter on survival rates of patients undergoing RC, neither for CSS (p = 0.912) nor OS (p = 0.618) or PFS (p = 0.900).
conclusionsOur small and single-center study was not able to demonstrate a significant independent influence of PLND on CSS, OS and PFS in octogenarians undergoing RC due to UCB. There is no doubt that RC should usually be combined with PLND, but the results of this small data set with a selected patient cohort indicate that RC without PLND might be an option in selected cases of elderly patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.