ArticleClinical genitourinary cancer2022
Safety and Efficacy of Reproductive Organ-Sparing Radical Cystectomy in Women With Variant Histology and Advanced Stage.
Article in Clinical genitourinary cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative evaluation of reproductive organ-preserving versus standard radical cystectomy in female: a meta-analysis and systematic review of perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- Clinical efficacy and safety of organ-sparing cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.PeerJ · 2024Pooled it
- Outcomes and Predictive Factors for Gynecologic Organ Involvement in Radical Cystectomy for Female Bladder Cancer Patients: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Optimizing local control in the surgical management of bladder cancer.Nature reviews. Urology · 2026Review
- Pelvic organ-sparing robot-assisted radical cystectomy in women with bladder cancer.BJU international · 2025Article
- Management of clinical stage T3/T4 bladder cancer: a review.World journal of urology · 2025Review
- Metastasis development in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer.Nature reviews. Urology · 2025Review
- Advocating female genital-sparing cystectomy as the standard of care for women with bladder cancer Re: "2025 Canadian Urological Association Guideline: Muscle-invasive bladder cancer" (Can Urol Assoc J 2025;19:E1-16).Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2025Article
- Review
- Reproductive organ involvement in women undergoing radical cystectomy for urothelial bladder cancer: a nationwide multicenter study.International journal of clinical oncology · 2024Article
- Evidence-Based Analysis of the Critical Steps of Radical Cystectomy for Bladder Cancer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Practice Patterns Regarding Female Reproductive Organ-Sparing and Nerve-Sparing Radical Cystectomy Among Urologic Oncologists in the United States.Clinical genitourinary cancer · 2023Article
- Radical cystectomy and urinary diversion in women: techniques, outcomes, and challenges-a narrative review.Translational andrology and urology · 2022Review
- Urothelial carcinoma: Perioperative considerations from top to bottom.CA: a cancer journal for cliniciansReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMuscle invasive bladder cancer surgical management has been historically a radical cystoprostatectomy in males and an anterior exenteration in females. Uterine, ovarian, and vaginal preservation are utilized, but raise concerns regarding risk to oncologic control, especially in variant histopathology or advanced stage. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective single institutional analysis identified radical cystectomies performed in women, including those with variant histology, which were defined as reproductive organ sparing (uterine, vaginal, and ovary sparing) or nonorgan sparing. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for recurrence-free survival (RFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced disease.
resultsFrom 2000 to 2020, 289 women were identified, 188 underwent reproductive organ-sparing cystectomy. No statistical differences were noted for clinical parameters or presence of variant histology for organ-sparing (ROS) and nonorgan-sparing (non-ROS). Positive margin rates did not differ for ROS and non-ROS; 4.3% vs. 7.9%, P = .19, respectively. Median RFS was not statistically significantly different for ROS vs. non-ROS (26.1 vs. 15.3 months) P = .937 hazard ratio (HR) 1.024. CSS was not statistically different for ROS vs. non-ROS (36.3 vs. 28.6 months), P = .755 HR 0.9. OS was not statistically different for ROS vs. non-ROS (25.8 vs. 23.8 months), P = .5 HR = 1.178. Variant histology did not change survival (HR 1.1, P = .643).
conclusionIn this analysis, ROS in women with advanced disease did not increase positive margin rates or decrease RFS, CSS, or OS compared to non-ROS. Variant histology did not decrease survival odds. Based on preoperative assessment and intraoperative findings, ROS in patients with variant histology and advanced disease should be considered.
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.