Systematic review and meta-analysis of non RCT's on health related quality of life after radical cystectomy using validated questionnaires: Better results with orthotopic neobladder versus ileal conduit

Cerruto MA, D'Elia C, Siracusano S, Gedeshi X, Mariotto A, Iafrate M, Niero M, Lonardi C et al.

European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology, 2016

Abstract

PURPOSE: The current literature on the impact of different urinary diversions on patients' health related quality of life (HR-QoL) showed a marginally better quality of life scores of orthotopic neobladder (ONB) compared to ileal conduit (IC). The aim of this study was to update the review of all relevant published studies on the comparison between ONB and IC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Studies were identified by searching multiple literature databases, including MEDLINE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, PubMed Data were synthesized using meta-analytic methods conformed to the PRISMA statement.

RESULTS: The current meta-analysis was based on 18 papers that reported a HR-QoL comparison between IC and ONB using at least a validate questionnaire. Pooled effect sizes of combined QoL outcomes for IC versus ONB showed a slight, but not significant, better QoL in patients with ONB (Hedges' g = 0.150; p = 0.066). Patients with ileal ONB showed a significant better QoL than those with IC (Hedges' g = 0.278; p = 0.000); in case series with more than 65% males, ONB group showed a slight significant better QoL than IC (Hedges' g = 0.190; p = 0.024). Pooled effects sizes of all EORTC-QLQ-C30 aspects showed a significant better QoL in patients with ONB (Hedges' g = 0.400; p = 0.0000).

CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis of not-randomized comparative studies on the impact of different types of urinary diversions on HR-QoL showed demonstrated a significant advantage of ileal ONB compared to IC in…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

• DOI
• PubMed
• Publisher page

Related studies

• Understanding the factors influencing fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda J.E. Smith) damage in African smallholder maize fields and quantifying its impact on yield. A case study in Eastern Zimbabwe Crop Protection, 2019
• Alarming situation of emerging H5 and H7 avian influenza and effective control strategies Emerging Microbes and Infections, 2022
• Livestock and food security: vulnerability to population growth and climate change Global Change Biology, 2014
• Atmosphere–ocean oxygen and productivity dynamics during early animal radiations Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2019
• Characterization of the global distribution and diversified plasmid reservoirs of the colistin resistance gene mcr-9 Scientific Reports, 2020
• The global seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii in pigs: A systematic review and meta-analysis Veterinary parasitology, 2019

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free