Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35488409›Full record

ArticleBJU international2023

Do we need repeat transurethral resection after en bloc resection for pathological T1 bladder cancer?

Takafumi Yanagisawa, Shun Sato, Yasushi Hayashida, Yohei Okada, Kosuke Iwatani, Akihiro Matsukawa, Takahiro Kimura, Hiroyuki Takahashi, Shin Egawa, Shahrokh F Shariat and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJU international, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Perioperative Safety and Long-Term Oncological Outcomes of En Bloc Resection of Bladder Tumor: A Multicenter Real-World Study of 668 Patients.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 4 institutions in 6 countries.

Takafumi YanagisawaDepartment of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-7410-0712
Shun SatoDepartment of Pathology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-4852-7704
Yasushi HayashidaDepartment of Urology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Saga, Japan.
Yohei OkadaDepartment of Urology, Saitama Medical Center, Saitama, Japan.
Kosuke IwataniDepartment of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Akihiro MatsukawaDepartment of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Takahiro KimuraDepartment of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Hiroyuki TakahashiDepartment of Pathology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Shin EgawaDepartment of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Shahrokh F ShariatDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Jun MikiDepartment of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-4638-8640
Jikei University School of Medicine · JPAl-Ahliyya Amman University · JONational Hospital Organization · JPSocial Insurance Saitama Chuo Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo assess the clinical significance of repeat transurethral resection (reTUR) and surgical margin status after en bloc resection of bladder tumour (ERBT) for pathological T1 (pT1) bladder cancer. PATIENTS AND

methodsWe retrospectively analysed the record of 106 patients with pT1 high-grade bladder cancer who underwent ERBT between April 2013 and February 2021 at multiple institutions. All specimens were reviewed by a genitourinary pathologist. The primary outcome measures were recurrence-free survival (RFS) and progression-free survival (PFS) between patients with and those without reTUR. We also analysed the predictive value of surgical margin on the likelihood of residual tumour on reTUR.

resultsA reTUR was performed in 50 of the 106 patients. The 2-year RFS and 3-year PFS were comparable between patients who underwent reTUR and those who did not (55.1% vs 59.9%, P = 0.6, 80.6% vs 82.6%, P = 0.6, respectively). No patient was upstaged to pT2 on reTUR. Regarding the surgical margin status, there were no recurrences at the original site in 51 patients with negative horizontal margins. Cox proportional hazard analysis revealed that a positive vertical margin was an independent prognostic factor of worse PFS. On reTUR, six pTa/is residues were detected in patients with a positive horizontal margin, and three pT1 residues were detected in one patient with a positive vertical margin or other adverse pathological features.

conclusionsA reTUR after ERBT for pT1 bladder cancer appears not to improve either recurrence or progression. Surgical margin status affects prognosis and reTUR outcomes. A reTUR can be omitted after ERBT in patients with pT1 bladder cancer and negative margins; for those with positive horizontal or vertical margins, reTUR should remain the standard until proven otherwise.

Indexed as

Margins of ExcisionUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsHumansNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRetrospective StudiesUrinary BladderUrologic Surgical ProceduresBladder canceren bloc TURprogressionpT1recurrencerepeat TURs

Identifiers

PMID35488409
PMCPMC10084154
OpenAlexW4225164787

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.