3.9 Article

Transurethral Resection of Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer

期刊

EUROPEAN UROLOGY SUPPLEMENTS
卷 8, 期 7, 页码 542-548

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.eursup.2009.06.003

关键词

Bladder cancer; Bladder tumours; Fluorescence cystoscopy; Narrow-band imaging; Non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer; Random biopsies; Recurrences; Re-TUR; TURB; Understaging

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Transurethral resection of the bladder (TURB) is the initial and critical step in the management of bladder tumours. The aim of the procedure is to establish the histologic diagnosis, determine the tumour stage and grade, and achieve complete removal of papillary non-muscle-invasive tumours. Although TURB is a frequently performed procedure, its results are limited by the high recurrence rate and by the risk of tumour understaging. The major prerequisite for optimal outcomes is a systematically and meticulously performed procedure by a well-trained urologist. Smaller tumours can be resected en bloc; tumours > 1 cm should be resected separately in fractions. Deep resection, including the detrusor muscle, is essential for correct staging, The biopsy should be taken from all areas suggestive of carcinoma in situ (CIS), and biopsies from normal-looking mucosa are recommended only in patients with positive cytology or non-papillary tumours. TURB should be performed with modern equipment, including new telescopes and video systems. Moreover, urologists should be aware of promising innovations, including new imaging techniques, and their possible benefits. Re-TUR can improve recurrence-free survival (RFS) and tumour staging. It is recommended in any patient with a T1 or high-grade tumour at initial resection and when the pathologist has reported that the specimen contained no muscle. It should also be considered in cases where the urologist is not sure that the initial resection was complete, especially in extensive and multiple tumours. (C) European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据