There is a place for radical cystectomy and urinary diversion, including orthotopic bladder substitution, in patients aged 75 and older: Results of a retrospective observational analysis from a high-volume center

INTRODUCTION The incidence of cancer increases with age and owing to the changing demographics we are increasingly confronted with treating bladder cancer in old patients. We report our results in patients>75 years of age who underwent open radical cystectomy (RC) and urinary diversion. MATERIAL AND METHODS From January 2000 to March 2013, a consecutive series of 224 old patients with complete follow-up who underwent RC and urinary diversion (ileal orthotopic bladder substitute [OBS], ileal conduit [IC], and ureterocutaneostomy [UCST]) were included in this retrospective single-center study. End points were the 90-day complication rates (Clavien-Dindo classification), 90-day mortality rates, overall and cancer-specific survival rates, and continence rates (OBS). RESULTS Median age was 79.2 years (range: 75.1-91.6); 35 of the 224 patients (17%) received an OBS, 178 of the 224 patients (78%) an IC, and 11 of the 224 patients (5%) an UCST. The 90-day complication rate was 54.3% in the OBS (major: Clavien grade 3-5: 22.9%, minor: Clavien Grade 1-2: 31.4%), 56.7% in the IC (major: 27%, minor: 29.8%), and 63.6% in the UCST group (major: 36.4%, minor: 27.3%); P = 0.001. The 90-day mortality was 0% in the OBS group, 13% in the IC group, and 10% in the UCST group (P = 0.077). The Glasgow prognostic score was an independent predictor of all survival parameters assessed, including 90-day mortality. Median follow-up was 22 months. Overall and cancer-specific survivals were 90 and 98, 47 and 91, and 11 and 12 months for OBS, IC, and UCST, respectively. In OBS patients, daytime continence was considered as dry in 66% and humid in 20% of patients. Nighttime continence was dry in 46% and humid 26% of patients. CONCLUSION With careful patient selection, oncological and functional outcome after RC can be good in old patients. Old age as the sole criterion should not preclude the indication for RC or the option of OBS. In old patients undergoing OBS, satisfactory continence results can be achieved.

Is there an age cutoff to apply adult formulas for GFR estimation in children?

BACKGROUND Estimation of glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) using a common formula for both adult and pediatric populations is challenging. Using inulin clearances (iGFRs), this study aims to investigate the existence of a precise age cutoff beyond which the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD), the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI), or the Cockroft-Gault (CG) formulas, can be applied with acceptable precision. Performance of the new Schwartz formula according to age is also evaluated. METHOD We compared 503 iGFRs for 503 children aged between 33 months and 18 years to eGFRs. To define the most precise age cutoff value for each formula, a circular binary segmentation method analyzing the formulas' bias values according to the children's ages was performed. Bias was defined by the difference between iGFRs and eGFRs. To validate the identified cutoff, 30% accuracy was calculated. RESULTS For MDRD, CKD-EPI and CG, the best age cutoff was ≥14.3, ≥14.2 and ≤10.8 years, respectively. The lowest mean bias and highest accuracy were -17.11 and 64.7% for MDRD, 27.4 and 51% for CKD-EPI, and 8.31 and 77.2% for CG. The Schwartz formula showed the best performance below the age of 10.9 years. CONCLUSION For the MDRD and CKD-EPI formulas, the mean bias values decreased with increasing child age and these formulas were more accurate beyond an age cutoff of 14.3 and 14.2 years, respectively. For the CG and Schwartz formulas, the lowest mean bias values and the best accuracies were below an age cutoff of 10.8 and 10.9 years, respectively. Nevertheless, the accuracies of the formulas were still below the National Kidney Foundation Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative target to be validated in these age groups and, therefore, none of these formulas can be used to estimate GFR in children and adolescent populations.

Patient-Rated Outcomes of Lumbar Fusion in Patients with Degenerative Disease of the Lumbar Spine: Does Age Matter?

STUDY DESIGN Single centre retrospective study of prospectively collected data, nested within the Eurospine Spine Tango data acquisition system. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to assess the patient-rated outcome and complication rates associated with lumbar fusion procedures in three different age groups. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA There is a general reluctance to consider spinal fusion procedures in elderly patients due to the increased likelihood of complications. METHODS Before and at 3, 12, and 24 months after surgery, patients completed the multidimensional Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI). At the 3-, 12-, and 24-month follow-ups they also rated the Global Treatment Outcome (GTO) and their satisfaction with care. Patients were divided into three age groups: younger (≥50y < 65y; n = 317), older (≥65y < 80y; n = 350), and geriatric (≥ 80y; n = 40). RESULTS 707 consecutive patients were included. The preoperative comorbidity status differed significantly (p < 0.0001) between the age groups, with the highest scores in the geriatric group. Medical complications during surgery were lower in the younger age group (7%) than in the older (13.4%; p = 0.006) and geriatric groups (17.5%; p = 0.007); surgical complications tended to be higher in the elderly group (younger, 6.3%; older, 6.0%; geriatric, 15.0%; p = 0.09). There were no significant group differences (p > 0.05) for the scores on any of the COMI domains, GTO, or patient-rated satisfaction at either 3-, 12-, and 24-months follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Despite greater comorbidity and complication rates in geriatric patients, the patient-rated outcome was as good in the elderly as it was in younger age groups up to two years after surgery. These data indicate that geriatric age needs careful consideration of associated risks but is not per se a contraindication for fusion for lumbar degenerative disease. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 4.