IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0276816.html

Quality improvement in managing patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer by introducing a surgical checklist for transurethral resection of bladder tumor

Author

Listed:
  • Hiroshi Kikuchi
  • Takahiro Osawa
  • Takashige Abe
  • Ryuji Matsumoto
  • Satoru Maruyama
  • Sachiyo Murai
  • Nobuo Shinohara

Abstract

Background: The quality of transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) markedly varies among surgeons and may have a considerable impact on treatment outcomes. The importance of a surgical checklist for TURBT has been suggested in order to standardize the procedure and improve surgical and oncological outcomes. In the present study, we verified the usefulness of a checklist for managing patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). Methods: This retrospective study included 201 NMIBC patients diagnosed with Ta, T1, or Tis between October 2011 and February 2021. After September 2016, TURBT was performed with a checklist. We analyzed the intravesical recurrence-free survival (RFS) rate and the presence or absence of the detrusor muscle in resected specimens before and after the introduction of the checklist. Survival rates were compared using the Log-rank test. A multivariate analysis with Cox proportional hazards modeling was performed to verify risk factors for intravesical recurrence. Results: Ninety-nine patients who underwent TURBT with the checklist (checklist group) were compared with 102 patients who underwent TURBT without the checklist (non-checklist group). When the analysis was narrowed down to 9 critical items, we observed a mean number of 9 documented items per operative report (98.0% completion) after implementation of the checklist. Two-year intravesical RFS rates in the checklist and non-checklist groups were 76.7 and 69.5%, respectively (p = 0.1059). The Cox proportional multivariate analysis showed that the rate of intravesical recurrence was slightly lower in the checklist group (hazard ratio 0.7376, 95% CI 0.4064–1.3388, P = 0.3170). Conclusion: The introduction of a checklist is recommended for the standardization of TURBT and increasing the quality of operative reporting, and it may also improve oncological outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Hiroshi Kikuchi & Takahiro Osawa & Takashige Abe & Ryuji Matsumoto & Satoru Maruyama & Sachiyo Murai & Nobuo Shinohara, 2022. "Quality improvement in managing patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer by introducing a surgical checklist for transurethral resection of bladder tumor," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(10), pages 1-8, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0276816
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0276816
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0276816
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0276816&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0276816?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0276816. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.