Mp68-11 Estimating the Bladder-Outlet Procedural Load After Different Prostate Cancer Treatment: A Population-Based Analysis

You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Epidemiology & Natural History II (MP68)1 May 2024MP68-11 ESTIMATING THE BLADDER-OUTLET PROCEDURAL LOAD AFTER DIFFERENT PROSTATE CANCER TREATMENT: A POPULATION-BASED ANALYSIS Carlos I. Calvo and Keith F. Rourke Carlos I. CalvoCarlos I. Calvo and Keith F. RourkeKeith F. Rourke View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001008744.60568.e8.11AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: There is a paucity of literature regarding the proportion of patients after prostate cancer (PC) treatment that will require a bladder outlet (BO) procedure in the long-term. Our objective is to assess the long-term incidence of BO procedures after various treatment modalities for PC. METHODS: All men with diagnosis of PC from 2002-2021 from The Alberta Cancer Registry were included. The Discharge Abstract Data & National Ambulatory Reporting System were searched for treatment modalities and urologic procedures. Patients were allocated into 6 different groups, radical prostatectomy (RP), radiotherapy (RT), cryotherapy (Cryo), medical treatment/observation (MT/O), RP+RT or RT+Cryo. BO procedure was defined as any invasive procedure performed at the bladder neck, prostate (including TURP) or urethra after 30 days of treatment (diagnostic procedures were excluded). We compared the incidence of interventions among different modalities. RESULTS: 47,387 patients with PC were identified with a median age of 66 years. 3,821 patients required a BO intervention at a median follow-up of 75 months. Table 1 shows the cumulative incidence during the observation period. On Kaplan-Meier analysis (Figure 1), the need for BO intervention was different between groups (p<0.001). On multivariable Cox-regression including stage (p<0.001), all treatment modalities were associated with a higher risk of BO procedures compared to patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. Specially, RT+Cryo (H.R. 5.2; p<0.001), RP+RT (H.R. 2.1; p<0.001) and MT/O (H.R. 1.7; p<0.001) posed the highest risk. Number of interventions needed differed among groups (p<0.001). While patients in MT/O had 1.4 procedures, combined therapy had a mean of 2.5 procedures done. CONCLUSIONS: The future risk of bladder-outlet interventions should be considered when counselling patients considering treatment for prostate cancer. Patients undergoing radical prostatectomy have the lowest risk of bladder outlet procedures in the long-term while combined therapies have the highest. Download PPT Source of Funding: Not applicable © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e1112 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Carlos I. Calvo More articles by this author Keith F. Rourke More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...