Extended versus non-extended lymphadenectomy during radical cystectomy for patients with bladder cancer: A meta-analysis of the effect on long-term and short-term outcomes

23Citations
Citations of this article
35Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Pelvic lymphadenectomy (PLND) is an integral part of curative surgery for high-risk non-muscle invasive and muscle-invasive bladder cancer. The therapeutic value of extended PLND is controversial. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive online search in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases for relevant literature directly comparing extended PLND (e-PLND) with non-extended PLND (ne-PLND) from database inception to June 2019. We performed the meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of PLND templates on recurrence-free survival (RFS), disease-specific survival (DSS), overall survival (OS), rates of postoperative major complications, and mortality within 90 days of surgery. Results: A total of 10 studies involving 3979 patients undergoing either e-PLND or ne-PLND were included. The results showed that e-PLND was significantly associated with better RFS (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.62-0.90, p = 0.002) and DSS (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.55-0.79, p < 0.001). However, no correlation was found between e-PLND template and a better OS (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.55-1.58, p = 0.79). Postoperative major complications were similar between e-PLND group and ne-PLND group, as was mortality within 90 days of surgery. Conclusion: e-PLND template is correlated with favorable RFS and DSS outcomes for patients with bladder cancer. e-PLND did not have more postoperative major complications than did ne-PLND.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Wang, Y. C., Wu, J., Dai, B., Shen, Y. J., Ma, C. G., Ye, D. W., & Zhu, Y. P. (2019). Extended versus non-extended lymphadenectomy during radical cystectomy for patients with bladder cancer: A meta-analysis of the effect on long-term and short-term outcomes. World Journal of Surgical Oncology, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-019-1759-5

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free