Restrictive transfusion in radical cystectomy is safe.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Perioperative blood transfusion (PBT) is commonplace in radical cystectomy (RC) and has been linked to poorer oncologic outcomes. Limiting PBT in this largely elderly and comorbid population has not been studied. Herein, we first investigate the safety of a restrictive transfusion protocol (RTP) in patients undergoing RC for urothelial carcinoma and then compare oncologic outcomes between patients who did and did not receive PBT. METHODS: Outcomes for 173 consecutive patients meeting inclusion criteria undergoing RC for urothelial carcinoma from April 2010 to June 2014 by a single surgeon employing RTP were analyzed from an institutional review board-approved, prospectively collected database. Pairwise matching to a cohort undergoing RC during an earlier era of more liberal PBT was performed, and 90-day outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Median follow-up for the RTP cohort was 3.1 years (range: 0-5.1y). Median age was 70 years (range: 38-93y). Forty-six patients (26.6%) received PBT. Eighty-seven matched pairs were generated from RTP cohort and liberal era where PBT rate was 94%. There were no differences in 90-day complication rates, mortality, or readmission rates (P>0.05). In the RTP cohort, patients who underwent PBT had higher estimated blood loss (500 vs. 350, P = 0.001), lower baseline hematocrit (28.9 vs. 33.3, P = 0.005), and similar operative time (5.8 vs. 5.3h, P = 0.01) and length of stay (5.5 vs. 5, P = 0.07). At discharge and 3-week follow-up, there was no difference in hematocrit (P>0.05). In the no-PBT group, 90-day (65.6% vs. 86.7%, P = 0.007) and high-grade (15.6% vs. 34.8%, P = 0.003) complication rates were lower. On multivariable analysis, predictors of PBT were age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.06, 95% CI [1.01-1.11]), Charlson comorbidity index≥2 (OR = 2.68, CI [1.09-7.04]), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (OR = 3.74, CI [1.46-10.19]),≥pT3 (OR = 5.5, CI [2.33-13.73]), baseline hematocrit (OR = 0.95, CI [0.87-1.00]), and estimated blood loss (OR = 1.001, CI [1-1.003]). PBT was associated with lower recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio = 2.16; CI [1.13-41.12]; P = 0.02) and overall survival (hazard ratio =2.25; CI [1.25-4.88]; P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The use of RTP in RC is safe. PBT was associated with poorer recurrence-free survival and overall survival independent of clinicopathologic characteristics.

Midline Extraperitoneal Approach to Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection in Testicular Cancer: Minimizing Surgical Morbidity.

BACKGROUND: Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) is an important component of the management of testicular germ cell tumor (GCT) but carries significant surgical morbidity. OBJECTIVE: To describe our experience with a midline extraperitoneal (EP) approach to RPLND for seminomatous and nonseminomatous GCT. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: From 2010 to 2015, 122 consecutive patients underwent RPLND from a prospective database. Patients requiring aortic resection or retrocrural dissection or with intraperitoneal disease were excluded. The remaining 69 patients underwent midline EP-RPLND. SURGICAL PROCEDURE: Open midline EP-RPLND was performed using a standardized technique. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Perioperative and long-term outcomes were analyzed. Complications were graded using the Clavien-Dindo classification. A descriptive analysis using SAS software was performed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 68 patients underwent midline EP-RPLND successfully (98.6%). The median age was 28 yr (range 17-55). On preoperative imaging the size of the retroperitoneal mass or lymphadenopathy was <2cm in 29 patients, 2-4.9cm in 15 patients, and >5cm in 24 patients, of which 19 were >10cm. The median estimated blood loss was 325ml (interquartile range [IQR] 200-612.5). The median number of lymph nodes resected was 36 (IQR 24.5-49); the median number of positive nodes was one (IQR 0-4). The median time for return of bowel function was 2 d (IQR 1-2) and hospital stay 3 d (IQR 3-4). There were no cases of ileus. Eleven patients had 12 (17.6%) 90-d complications. Of these, six (55%) were Clavien grade 1, five (45%) were grade 2, and one was grade 3b (1.5%). Antegrade ejaculation rates were 91.6% in the primary group and 96.8% in the post-chemotherapy group. CONCLUSIONS: Midline EP-RPLND can be performed safely without compromising the completeness of the resection. This approach is associated with rapid return of bowel function, minimal rates of ileus, and short hospital stay. PATIENT SUMMARY: A midline extraperitoneal approach for retroperitoneal lymph node dissection in testicular cancer is safe and effective and leads to faster return of bowel function and earlier discharge.

Midline extraperitoneal approach for retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for testicular germ cell tumor.

INTRODUCTION: Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) for the treatment of testicular germ cell tumor is technically difficult and associated with significant morbidity. We postulated that a novel midline extraperitoneal (EP) approach might minimize the morbidity. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS: We describe a midline extraperitoneal approach in detail. The operative time, estimated blood loss, lymph node yield, return of bowel function, length of stay, and postoperative complications were retrospectively reviewed. From April 2010 to May 2011, 12 consecutive patients underwent EP-RPLND at 2 tertiary centers by a single surgeon, including 5 primary and 7 postchemotherapy RPLNDs. The clinical characteristics and outcomes were compared with those from a matched cohort of transperitoneal-RPLND patients. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 173 and 201 days in the EP and transperitoneal groups, respectively. The EP group had a shorter mean operative time of 292 versus 337 minutes (P = .02) and lower estimated blood loss of 305 versus 575 mL (P = .05). More lymph nodes were retrieved in the EP group (44 vs 27 nodes, P = .0006). Finally, an earlier return of bowel function (1.7 vs 2.9 days, P = .0001) and a shorter median length of stay (3.3 vs 5.3 days, P = .0001) was seen in the EP group. CONCLUSION: EP-RPLND can be performed safely without prolonged operative times or compromised lymph node retrieval, even in the postchemotherapy setting, and is associated with a faster return of bowel function and shortened length of stay.