Venous Thromboembolism Rate in Patients with Bladder Cancer According to the Type of Treatment: A systematic review View PDF

*Omar R Abdullah
Warwick Medical School, University Of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom

*Corresponding Author:
Omar R Abdullah
Warwick Medical School, University Of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
Email:omaroncologist@gmail.com

Published on: 2021-12-23

Abstract

Background: Bladder cancer (BC) is classified as a high-risk tumor type for Venous Thrombo Embolism (VTE). VTE presents an extra challenge in the management of patients with cancer, given the increase in morbidity and mortality in having both conditions.
Objective: To summarise the contemporary evidence on the VTE rate in patients with BC according to the stage, type of anti-cancer treatment and highlight VTE rate in the UK and other countries.
Method: A systematic review was carried out and an electronic search for publications between January 2000 and November 2021 was done. Studies recording VTE in BC patients were included whilst paediatric patients, case reports, studies reporting on a mix of arterial and venous thrombosis, studies reporting DVT or PE only and recorded hospitalised VTE only were excluded. The rate of VTE, country of origin, risk factors and thromboprophylaxis duration for VTE in BC patients were identified.
Results: A total of 38 papers meeting the search criteria. All publications were original research papers (cohort studies). The overall VTE rate in patients with BC was estimated at 1.9 to 4.7%. For those patients undergoing cystectomy, VTE rate ranged from 3% to 17.6%; however, VTE rate in metastatic stage of BC patients ranged from 3.1% to 5.1%.
Conclusions: Rates of VTE in BC patients are high, further increased by interventions such as surgery and chemotherapy. Thromboprophylaxis measures should be optimised. This review highlighted the fact that VTE rate in BC varies between studies due to the heterogeneity of risk factors reported.

Keywords

Venous thromboembolism; Thrombosis; Bladder cancer

Introduction

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a disorder in which a thrombus forms, mostly in the deep veins of the lower or upper limbs, called a deep vein thrombosis (DVT); the thrombus may travel to the pulmonary arteries where it lodges causing a pulmonary embolism (PE). Together, DVT and PE are known as VTE. Cancer is an independent risk factor for VTE [1] and VTE is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer [2]. VTE negatively affects the quality of life and increases the risk of further complications such as recurrent VTE and bleeding [3]. In addition, utilization of health care resources in cancer patients who have VTE is high [3]. Cancer patients have a 5 to 6 fold increased risk of developing VTE compared with the general population; this can reach 7-fold for cancers of the brain, ovary and pancreas [4]. The pathogenesis of VTE in cancer patients is complex, related to interaction between the procoagulant properties of the malignant cells themselves, the haemostatic system and characteristics of patient [5].

BC is categorized as a high risk (for VTE) tumour type [6] These authors found a 6-month cumulative incidence of VTE in metastatic urothelial BC is 8.2%. VTE rates in patients with BC who have had a cystectomy range between 0.3% and 17.6% [7,8] Furthermore, in a USA study, exploring VTE in BC patients, the VTE rate was 7.5% [5.5– 9.9%] in USA and 3.8% [2.5–5.4%] in non-USA countries, P = 0.005. The standard treatment for muscle-invasive  non-metastatic bladder cancer is cystectomy or multimodality treatment (surgery – transure thral resection of bladder tumour plus chemo-radiotherapy). Muscle invasive BC is proven to increase the risk of VTE and this risk becomes even higher after cystectomy [9]

This systematic review was undertaken to summarise the contemporary evidence on the VTE rate in patients with BC according to the type of anti-cancer treatment and highlight the VTE rate in the UK vs other countries.

The risk of VTE in BC may vary between different countries due to different guidelines followed in BC management e.g. ESMO guidelines are generally used in Europe, NCCN guidelines are used internationally, in particular in the USA and NICE guidelines are used in the UK e.g. using neoadjuvant chemotherapy or not before cystectomy. Different treatment regimens are preferred in different countries e.g. the USA and using thromboprophylaxis for 14 or 28 days post cystectomy [10]

It is important to have evidence on VTE incidence in patients with BC according to known confounding variables for VTE, in the UK and other countries, so that healthcare professionals and patients are informed and can take appropriate action. In practice, optimizing treatment plans to decrease VTE risk while also reducing bleeding risk is significant to patients and the healthcare system; thus, the decision to use pharmacological thromboprophylaxis needs balance between risk of VTE and major bleeding [11].

The clinician needs to consider the balance between the risk of VTE and the risk of bleeding before prescribing pharmacological thromboprophylaxis [9]. This systematic review also reveals the rate of VTE in BC patients according to the treatments and length of thromboprophylaxis in the UK and other countries to inform the optimisation of thromboprophylaxis.

Aims and Objectives of Systematic Review

Aims: To find:

• The incidence rate of venous thromboembolism (VTE), according to the anti-cancer treatments received, in and out of the UK.

• The VTE rate differences between the UK and global data.

Objectives: To explore:

• The VTE rate in BC patients in the UK and other countries

• The evidence available on VTE rate in non-muscle invasive, muscle invasive, and metastatic BC patients in the UK and non-UK countries

• The influence of the duration of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis on VTE rate in patients with BC undergoing cystectomy

• The knowledge gaps of VTE in BC that demand further studies in the UK and non-UK country

Methods for systematic review

The Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Healthcare was utilised to guide this systematic review. A search was conducted in PubMed and Embase electronic databases (Appendix 2). In addition, conference proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Urological Association, the two largest international meetings of cancer and urology, were screened for potentially relevant records.

Search inclusion and exclusion criteria

The main outcome of interest was any VTE, which included symptomatic or incidentally detected DVT and PE, diagnosed in patients with BC.

Inclusion criteria:

• Primary research which confirmed the diagnosis of DVT and/or PE in BC patients

• Papers in the English language

• From January 2000 until November 2021

Exclusion criteria:

• Case reports

• Studies reporting DVT or PE only

• Studies recorded in-hospital VTE only

• Studies occasionally reporting on VTE as one of the adverse effects of surgery or chemotherapy

• Studies reporting on a mix of arterial and venous thrombosis as a composite endpoint or lack of clarity on venous thrombosis only

Data sources and searches

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and checklist were followed to develop this review. The following terms were used: ((‘bladder cancer’ OR bladder carcinoma’ OR ‘bladder tumour’ OR ‘bladder urothelial carcinoma’ OR ‘transitional cell carcinoma’) AND (‘VTE’ OR ‘DVT’ OR ‘PE’ OR ‘venous thromboembolism’ OR ‘thrombosis’ OR ‘thromboembolism’ OR ‘deep vein thrombosis’ OR ‘pulmonary embolism’ OR ‘lung embolism’)) [12].

Publications from January 2000 to June 2020 were included. Data on overall VTE incidence in BC patients were extracted from all related publications. These were the source data for the primary objective – incidence of VTE in BC patients. Reference list checking was carried out to identify further relevant studies. All titles and abstracts from the search were evaluated independently by two reviewers (DP and IM) and disagreements were resolved by a third arbitrator (AY).

Study quality assessment for systematic review

For each of the included studies, the risk of bias was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) standards and classified as good, fair, and poor. The NOS assigns up to a maximum of nine points for the least risk of bias in three domains: 1) selection of study groups (four points); 2) comparability of groups (two points); and 3) ascertainment of exposure and outcomes (three points) for cohort studies.

A maximum score of 2 can be awarded for comparability and a maximum score of 1 can be given for each of the remaining points. A study can have the maximum possible quality score of 9. Thresholds for converting the Newcastle-Ottawa scales to AHRQ standards were applied to have a clear view of quality assessment for each study (Appendix 1).

Ethical considerations for systematic review

Ethics committee approval was not required for this systematic review as this methodology utilises only previously published material, is not primary research and does not involve humans or data collection.

Results of Systematic Review

Descriptive characteristics

Of the 2921 publications, a total of 38 studies met the inclusion criteria and were selected for this systematic review. All stages of the extraction process are shown in the PRISMA flow diagram (Figure 1). In this current systematic review, all papers with one exception have good and fair quality according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and AHRQ standards (Tables 1 and Table 2).

All publications were original research papers (cohort studies) in which the VTE rate was clearly stated. The cohort studies were generated in different countries: ‘USA’, ‘Canada’, ‘Germany’, ‘France’, ‘Denmark’, ‘Netherlands’, ‘UK’, ‘Australia’, ‘Turkey’, and ‘Egypt’. The majority of the studies were carried out in the USA. The country of origin is summarised in the below figure (Figure 2).

The majority of papers included patients who had undergone cystectomy (n=33); (Figure 3). The further risk of VTE in patients receiving neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy (with curative intent) was only mentioned in four of the 33 papers. There are no data on VTE in patients having multimodality treatments. Only two papers discussed the VTE risk in patients receiving chemotherapy only [6]; two papers compared VTE rates in using thromboprophylaxis (TP) for two weeks and an extended duration of four weeks [14,15]; and one paper included patients having a Transurethral Resection Bladder Tumour (TURBT) only [16].

VTE rate in patients with bladder cancer

This review identified 38 studies specifying the VTE rate in BC patients, with a total of 172,380 BC patients being included, according to the type of treatments (Figure 3) and country of origin; however, two studies stated the overall VTE rate with no data on anti-cancer therapies or TP regimes [17,18] A cohort study conducted in the UK explored the VTE rate in all cancer patients including 3152 BC patients, and the absolute rate per 1000 person years of VTE in BC was 15 [19]. In the US, Sandhu et al., (2010) carried out a retrospective cohort study for 24,861 patients with BC to look at VTE rate over 6-years. The 1-year and 2-year rate of VTE after cancer diagnosis was 1.6% and 1.9%, respectively [17]. Taking both studies together, VTE rates in BC patients were an average of 1.9 to 4.7% (mean = 3.3%) within two years of BC diagnosis. The VTE rate in BC patients in the UK was more than double in the USA.

VTE rate in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer undergoing transurethral resection bladder tumour

The effect of minimally invasive surgery, TURBT, on the VTE rate in BC patients has rarely been investigated. A single study used the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database, which explored the VTE rate in patients who had TURBT for non-muscle invasive bladder cancer patients. The study reviewed data from 1988 to 2009 for 50,125 patients treated with TURBT; 2.8% of patients experienced VTE within 90 days post TURBT [16]. In nonmuscle-invasive BC undergoing TURBT, no thromboprophylaxis was utilised due to lack of evidence on the VTE risk as well as concerns around bleeding.

VTE in patients with bladder cancer undergoing cystectomy

The data from 33 studies of patients with BC undergoing cystectomy (invasive surgery) (Tables 1 & 2) were extracted to find the rate of VTE in patients undergoing cystectomy alone and patients having a cystectomy plus chemotherapy and in and out with the UK. The VTE rates at different time points post-cystectomy were identified - 30 days, 90 days, 180 days, 1 year or 2 years. All studies included found an elevated risk of VTE among patients undergoing cystectomy. The rates of VTE in BC patients who had cystectomy were between 1.3% and 23.2% (mean=4.9%) (Table 1). In the UK, two studies explored the rate of VTE in patients undergoing cystectomy and the VTE rates were 2.5% and 2.9% mean=2.7% [20,21]. Three Canadian studies and one from Turkey demonstrated a VTE rate of BC patients treated with chemotherapy and cystectomy of between 1.3% and 9% (mean=5.1%) (Table 1). There were no studies that explored the VTE rate in BC patients having cystectomy and chemotherapy.

Regarding thromboprophylaxis post-cystectomy, 30 studies did not clearly discuss thromboprophylaxis regimens for BC patients undergoing cystectomy (Table 1). However, two studies from the USA explored thromboprophylaxis effectiveness in BC patients with cystectomy in the post-surgical period (Table 2). These two studies grouped patients by receiving thromboprophylaxis for 14 days or 28 days post-cystectomy. The patients were followed for 90 days duration. A substantial reduction in VTE rate (from 17.6% to 5%) was recorded in the extended thromboprophylaxis (28 days) group in comparison to the control group (14 days); extended chemoprophylaxis significantly reduced the incidence of VTE (P value= 0.021) [15]. No UK studies explored the impact of using extended thromboprophylaxis on the VTE rate in BC patients who have had cystectomy.

VTE in bladder cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy

Only two studies exploring the VTE in muscle-invasive BC who received chemotherapy were found, and the VTE rates were 5.1% and 8.1% (mean=6.6%) [13,6]. The VTE rate within six months from diagnosis of metastatic urothelial cancer (not specifically bladder cancer) is 3.2%, and VTE rate in metastatic urothelial cancer and receiving chemotherapy is 5.1% [6]. No data exclusively relating to patients with BC who have had chemotherapy only were found to assess the benefits or drawbacks of thromboprophylaxis in this population. The studies around VTE rate in BC patients who were undergone cystectomy and/ or chemotherapy treatment are summarised in Table 1.

The mean of VTE rates in BC patients who had undergone radical cystectomy in the UK was lower than in non-UK countries as a group Figure 4.

Discussion of Systematic Review

This review explored the mean of VTE rates within and outside the UK and found the difference with the mean of VTE rates in nonUK countries according to type of treatments or VTE risk factors in patients with BC. The VTE rates were explored in BC patients according to the risk factors impacting on the rate of VTE such as surgery, chemotherapy and thromboprophylaxis in the UK and nonUK countries, where possible. 

The review of the VTE rate in patients with BC elicited 38 prospective and retrospective studies that demonstrated VTE rates in different follow-up periods among BC patients who have had a radical cystectomy Tables 1 & 2. Each study has a different rate of VTE and therefore a wide range of VTE rate in patients having cystectomy is noted 1.3% to 23.2% in this current review Tables 1 & 2. Regarding UK studies, they were only two studies that collected data on the VTE rate in BC patients who have had cystectomy in the UK and these studies were carried out some years ago 2012 and 2013. Hence, due to lack of new and enough number of studies more than four studies in recent years, it would be unlikely to be beneficial to carry out a meta-analysis of VTE rate in BC patients based on country UK vs non-UK countries. It is important to undertake new studies exploring the VTE rate in BC patients in the UK.

A previous systematic review was carried out on the risk of VTE and bleeding in patients having open radical cystectomy [9]. Many studies included in Tikkinen’s systematic review were occasionally reported the VTE rate as one of the adverse effects of surgery, and it seems that these studies did not check for VTE events carefully. These data may be at risk of information bias [9].

There are many possible explanations for the large variations in the rates of VTE observed within this group: for example, the heterogeneity of risk factors in this population that could affect the rate of VTE, such as minimal invasive robotic cystectomy or open radical cystectomy [10]. Additionally, 30 of the included studies did not state, discuss or categories BC patients according to confounding factors that alter the rate of VTE, such as receiving surgical thromboprophylaxis for 14 or 28 days, then makes it difficult to compare rates between studies. All included studies with the exception of two [14,15] did not clearly discuss or state the thromboprophylaxis measures employed.

Having different thromboprophylaxis protocols may be the cause of variation in VTE rate between studies and countries using extended thromboprophylaxis 28 days post-surgery decrease VTE rate in BC patients with cystectomy Table 1 and Table 2.

The timing of follow up differs between surgical studies. The minimum follow-up duration of patients undergoing cystectomy was 28 days and the VTE rates were 3% -7.7% mean=5.6%. In this review, we excluded studies which only drew on data relating to VTE during inhospital admission because the vast majority of VTEs 82.6% occur after discharge from hospital; in other words, there was an inadequate followup for VTE in patients undergoing cystectomy [23]. In our current review, the data from three studies that followed up the patients for three months after cystectomy revealed that VTE rates were still high; this may be due to patients having further treatment and hospitalisation [54,43 and 6]. According to the study by Wallis et al., 2017, the VTE rate peaks at 20 days after cystectomy in BC patients; however, patients continue to be at risk of VTE long after surgery [46]. As found in this review, BC patients who had undergone cystectomy have an elevated risk of VTE for up to 3 months after surgery [38]. Consideration should thus be given to offering thromboprophylaxis measures and caring for longer than 28 days post cystectomy, in particular, if chemotherapy has been added to the treatment plan or patients have other risk factors for VTE. The majority of BC guidelines typically suggest extended thromboprophylaxis for pelvic surgery including cystectomy for up to four weeks post?discharge [55] Interestingly, the mean of VTE rates in patients who have had cystectomy with chemotherapy is 5.0 [43,38 and 29], suggesting that systemic chemotherapy did not increase the VTE rate more than the already increased rate imposed by surgery

Brennan and his team 2018 also mentioned that chemotherapy is not associated with an increased risk of VTE after RC [43]. The presence of metastatic disease increases the VTE rate to the same extent as cystectomy by 5.1% [56]. However, patients with metastatic BC who did not receive chemotherapy had an absolute VTE incidence rate of 3.2% [6]. The VTE rate in patients with metastatic BC who receive systemic chemotherapy further increased to 5.1% within 6 months. VTE rates based on the chemotherapy group demonstrated no statistical difference when gemcitabine/cisplatin was used as the comparator [6].

Gopalakrishna et al., 2016 mentioned that the VTE rate differed significantly by country of origin among BC patients [56]. This is likely to be due to differences in patients’ characteristics, using preoperative chemotherapy, recording issues and using different protocols of thromboprophylaxis. Thus, it is of value to find the VTE rate in the UK and not depend on the data from non-UK countries, in order to scope the problem and strive to protect the patients from this debilitating condition. The VTE rates were 2.5% and 2.9% within one-year post cystectomy as the UK study found [20,21].

The VTE rate in BC patients varies according to the type of treatment and the use of thromboprophylaxis. Additionally, the mean of VTE rates in BC patients in the UK is lower than the mean of nonUK countries, which indicates that there is a variation in VTE rates in BC patients between the UK and non-UK countries Figure 4.

According to the author, the VTE rate in BC patients in the UK seems lower than that of non-UK countries, perhaps due to the extended thromboprophylaxis regimens applied post cystectomy. More data in the UK are required to document the VTE rate in patients who have had a cystectomy and patients treated with cystectomy and chemotherapy. This current review has some limitations, however, as many studies included did not report all variables of interest e.g. thromboprophylaxis measures and chemotherapy prescribed, but mainly reported VTE rate and the country origin of study. The strengths of this current systematic review include the comprehensive search strategy, the risk of bias assessment and exploring other risk factors for VTE in the BC population.

In summary, this review found the VTE rates in patients with BC who have had cystectomy or chemotherapy are around 2.7% and 5.2%, respectively. There are no data on VTE in BC patients who have had radiotherapy, and very limited data regarding VTE in BC patients who have had cystectomy and chemotherapy in the UK. No data explored the radiotherapy risk factors for the VTE in BC patients.

 

Conclusion

This review highlights the fact that VTE rate in BC varies between studies due to the heterogeneity of risk factors cystectomy, chemotherapy and thromboprophylaxis reported. The mean of VTE rates in BC patients who have had cystectomy in the UK seems lower than in non-UK countries. In the UK, there are only two studies that explored the VTE incidence in patients with [20, 19].

The review also highlights the condition of VTE in BC patients, and thus will help to inform clinicians and patients about different VTE risk factors in this patient population. VTE rates in patients with BC are affected by the duration of thromboprophylaxis in patients who have had cystectomy, so this study supports extended anti-clotting prophylaxis in patients undergoing cystectomy. 

The VTE rates obtained from this current review may contribute towards clinical decision-making on the duration of thromboprophylaxis in BC patients having a cystectomy. Standardisation of reporting may help improve the evaluation of risk.

Recommendation

Further studies to explore the VTE rate in patients with BC, undergoing cystectomy or receiving multimodality bladder preservation treatment, should be carried out in the UK, to garner more robust data to better protect patients from this debilitating condition. More studies on prophylactic measures for BC patients also would be required.

List of abbreviations

ACT: Adjuvant chemotherapy

BC: Bladder Cancer

CT: Chemotherapy

DVT: Deep Vein Thrombosis

HES: Hospital Episode Statistics

INT: International

NCT: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy

PE: Pulmonary Embolism

TURBT: Transurethral of Bladder Tumour

VTE: Venous Thromboembolism

Availability of Data and Materials

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study

Disclosure of Conflict of Interests

OA – none declared

DP – none declared

IM – none declared

AY – Honoraria from: Bayer, Leo Pharma and BMS/Pfizer Alliance

Educational grant from: Bayer

Funding

The first author is funded by the Council for At-Risk Academics CARA and the University of Warwick to undertake this work.

Author contributions

Manuscript writing: Omar Abdullah

Final approval of manuscript: All authors

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

Not applicable.

 

References

  1. Khorana AA, Connolly GC (2009) Assessing risk of venous thromboembolism in the patient with cancer. J Clin Oncol 27: 4839-4847. https://doi.org/10.1200/ jco.2009.22.3271
  2. Elyamany G, Alzahrani AM, Bukhar, E (2014) Cancer-associated thrombosis: an overview. Clin Med Insights Oncol 8: 129-137. https://dx.doi.org/10.4137%2FCMO. S18991
  3. Khalil J, Bensaid B, Elkacemi H, Afif M, Bensaid Y, et al. (2015) Venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: an underestimated major health problem. World J Surg Oncol 13: 204. https://dx.doi.org/10.1186%2Fs12957-015-0592-8
  4. Fennerty A (2006) Venous thromboembolic disease and cancer. Postgraduate Medical Journal, 82: 642-648. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/pgmj.2006.046987
  5. Prandoni P, Falanga A, Piccioli A (2005) Cancer and venous thromboembolism. Lancet Oncol 6: 401-410. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(05)70207-2
  6. Ramos JD, Casey MF, Crabb SJ, Bamias A, Harshman LC, et al. (2017) Venous thromboembolism in metastatic urothelial carcinoma or variant histologies: incidence, associative factors, and effect on survival. Cancer Med 6: 186-194. https://doi. org/10.1002/cam4.986
  7. Ording AG, Nielsen ME, Smith AB, Horvath-Puho E, Sorensen HT (2016a) Venous thromboembolism and effect of comorbidity in bladder cancer: A danish nationwide cohort study of 13,809 patients diagnosed between 1995 and 2011. Urol Oncol 34: 292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.02.014
  8. Schomburg J, Krishna S, Soubra A, Cotter K, Fan Y, et al. (2018) Extended outpatient chemoprophylaxis reduces venous thromboembolism after radical cystectomy. Urol Oncol 36: 77.e79-77.e13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2017.09.029
  9. Tikkinen KA, Craigie S, Agarwal A, Violette PD, Novara G, et al. (2017) Procedurespecific risks of thrombosis and bleeding in urological cancer surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2017.03.008
  10. Fantony, JJ, Gopalakrishna A, Noord MV, Inman BA (2016) Reporting bias leading to discordant venous thromboembolism rates in the United States Versus Non-US countries following radical cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus 2: 189-196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2015.09.003
  11. Tikkinen, KA, Agarwal A, Craigie S, Cartwright R, Gould MK, et al. (2014) Systematic reviews of observational studies of risk of thrombosis and bleeding in urological surgery (ROTBUS): introduction and methodology. Syst Rev 3: 150. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-3-150
  12. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ 339: b2535. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2535
  13. Khorana AA, Dalal M, Lin J, Connolly GC (2013) Incidence and predictors of venous thromboembolism (VTE) among ambulatory high-risk cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy in the United States. Cancer 119: 648-655. https://doi.org/10.1002/ cncr.27772
  14. Pariser JJ, Pearce SM, Anderson BB, Packiam VT, Prachand VN, et al. (2017) Extended duration enoxaparin decreases the rate of venous thromboembolic events after radical cystectomy compared to inpatient only subcutaneous heparin. J Urol 197: 302-307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.08.090
  15. Schomburg J, Krishna S, Soubra A, Cotter K, Fan Y, et al. (2018) Extended outpatient chemoprophylaxis reduces venous thromboembolism after radical cystectomy. Urol Oncol 36: 77.e9-77.e13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2017.09.029
  16. Zaffuto E, Pompe R, Moschini M, Bondarenko HD, Dell’Oglio P, et al. (2017) Incidence and risk factors for venous thromboembolism after transurethral resection of bladder tumor: A population-based analysis. European Urology Supplements, 16: e468-e469. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1569-9056(17)30333-0
  17. Sandhu R, Pan CX, Wun T, Harvey D, Zhou H, et al. (2010) The incidence of venous thromboembolism and its effect on survival among patients with primary bladder cancer. Cancer 116: 2596-2603. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.25004
  18. Walker AJ, Card TR, West J, Crooks C, Grainge M J (2013b) Incidence of venous thromboembolism i
  19. n patients with cancer–a cohort study using linked United Kingdom databases. Eur J Cancer 49: 1404-1413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2012.10.021 Walker AJ, Card TR, West J, Crooks C, Grainge M J (2013a) Incidence of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer–a cohort study using linked United Kingdom databases. Eur J Cancer 49: 1404-1413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2012.10.021
  20. Dyer J, Wyke S, Lynch C (2013) Hospital episode statistics data analysis of postoperative venous thromboembolus in patients undergoing urological surgery: a review of 126,891 cases. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 95: 65-69. https://doi.org/10.1308/00 3588413x13511609956219
  21. Khan MS, Challacombe B, Elhage O, Rimington P, Coker B, et al. (2012) A dual-centre, cohort comparison of open, laparoscopic and robotic-assisted radical cystectomy. Int J Clin Pract 66: 656-662. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2011.02888.x
  22. De Martino RR, Goodney PP, Spangler EL, Wallaert JB, Corriere MA, et al. (2012) Variation in thromboembolic complications among patients undergoing commonly performed cancer operations. J Vasc Surg 55: 1035-1040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jvs.2011.10.129
  23. Alberts BD, Woldu SL, Weinberg AC, Danzig MR, Korets, R, et al. (2014) Venous thromboembolism after major urologic oncology surgery: a focus on the incidence and timing of thromboembolic events after 27,455 operations. Urology 84: 799-806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2014.05.055
  24. Soave A, Riethdorf S, Dahlem R, Weisbach L, Maurer V, et al. (2016) Mp49-07 the risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism according to the circulating tumor cell status in patients with urothelial carcinoma of the bladder treated with radical cystectomy. J Urol 195: e666-e667.
  25. Vukina J, McBride A, McKibben M, Matthews J, Pruthi R, Wallen, et al. (2014) Identifying incidence and risk factors for vte among cystectomy patients for bladder cancer. J Urol 191: e31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.02.173
  26. Mossanen M, Holt S, James A, Calvert J, Wright J et al. (2014) PD18-09 Comparative effectiveness of prophylactic anticoagulation in patients undergoing radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. J Urol 191:e538. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.02.1504
  27. Chen Emily C, Papa N, Lawrentschuk N, Bolton D, Sengupta, S (2016) Incidence and risk factors of venous thromboembolism after pelvic uro?oncologic surgery-a single center experience. BJU Int 117: 50-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13238
  28. Lyon TD, Tollefson MK, Shah PH, Bews K, Frank I, et al. (2018) Temporal trends in venous thromboembolism after radical cystectomy. Urol Oncol 36: 361.e315-361. e321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2018.05.015
  29. Van Dlac, Cowan N (2014) Identifying practice patterns for thromboprophylaxis after radical cystectomy. Journal of Urology 191: e495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. juro.2014.02.1126 
  30. Daneshmand S, Ahmadi H, Schuckman AK, Mitra AP, Cai J, et al. (2014) Enhanced recovery protocol after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. J Urol 192: 50-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.01.097
  31. Cookson MS, Chang SS, Wells N, Parekh DJ, Smith JA (2003) Complications of radical cystectomy for nonmuscle invasive disease: comparison with muscle invasive disease. J Urol 169 : 101-104. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000039521.77948.f9
  32. Breau R, Lavallee L, Witiuk K, Mallick R, Fergusson D, et al. (2014) MP60-20 Adverse outcomes following radical cystectomy. J Urol 191: e640. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.02.1774
  33. Tyson MD, Castle EP, Humphreys MR, Andrews PE (2014) Venous thromboembolism after urological surgery. J Urol 192: 793-797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. juro.2014.02.092
  34. De Vries RR, Kauer, P, van Tinteren H, van der Poel HG, Bex A, et al. (2012) Shortterm outcome after cystectomy: comparison of two different perioperative protocols. Urol Int 88: 383-389. https://doi.org/10.1159/000336155
  35. Nguyen TT, Huillard O, Dabi Y, Anract J, Sibony M, et al. (2018) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer and its impact on surgical morbidity and oncological outcomes: a real-world experience. Front Surg 5: 58. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2018.00058
  36. Brossner C, Pycha A, Toth A, Mian C, Guddemi A, et al. (2004) Does extended lymphadenectomy increase morbidity in association with radical cystectomy? BJU Int 93: 64-66. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410x.2004.04557.x
  37. Hugen C, Stern A, Cai J, Miranda G, Schuckman A, et al. (2017) Pd36-10 Venous thromboembolism rates following radical cystectomy stratified by method of prophylaxis. J Urol 197: e672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.02.1559
  38. Doiron RC, Booth CM, Wei X, Siemens DR (2016) Risk factors and timing of venous thromboembolism after radical cystectomy in routine clinical practice: a populationbased study. BJU Int 118: 714-722. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13443
  39. Sun AJ, Djaladat H, Schuckman A, Miranda G, Cai J, et al. (2015) venous thromboembolism following radical cystectomy: Significant predictors, comparison of different anticoagulants and timing of events. J Urol 193: 565-569. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.08.085
  40. Fairey A, Chetner M, Metcalfe J, Moore R, Todd G, et al. (2008) Associations among age, comorbidity and clinical outcomes after radical cystectomy: results from the Alberta urology institute radical cystectomy database. J Urol 180: 128-134. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.03.057
  41. James A, Wright J, Porter M, Holt S, Gore J (2013) 1442 Burden of venothrombotic events in patients undergoing radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. 189: e591. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.02.2796
  42. Laymon M, Harraz A, Elshal A, Shokeir A, Elbakry A, et al. (2019) Venous thromboembolism after radical cystectomy and urinary diversion: a single-center experience with 1737 consecutive patients. Scand J Urol 53: 392-397. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/21681805.2019.1698652
  43. Brennan K, Karim S, Doiron RC, Siemens DR, Booth CM (2018) Venous thromboembolism and peri-operative chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a population-based study. Bladder Cancer 4: 419-428. https://doi.org/10.3233/ blc-180184
  44. Khafagy M, Shaheed FA, Moneim TA (2006) Ileocaecal vs ileal neobladder after radical cystectomy in patients with bladder cancer: A comparative study. BJU Int 97: 799-804. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410x.2006.05996.x
  45. Ording AG, Nielsen ME, Smith AB, Horvath-Puho E, Sorensen HT (2016b) Venous thromboembolism and effect of comorbidity in bladder cancer: A danish nationwide cohort study of 13,809 patients diagnosed between 1995 and 2011. Urol Oncol 34: 292.e1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.02.014
  46. Wallis C, Khana S, Hajiha M, Nam RK, Satkunasivam R (2017a) Radical cystectomy in patients with disseminated disease: An assessment of perioperative outcomes using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Can Urol Assoc J 11: 244-248. https://dx.doi.org/10.5489%2Fcuaj.4208
  47. Sandhu R, Pan CX, Wun T, Harvey D, Zhou H, et al. (2010b) The incidence of venous thromboembolism and its effect on survival among patients with primary bladder cancer. Cancer 116: 2596-2603. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.25004
  48. Berneking AD, Rosevear HM, Askeland EJ, Newton MR, O’Donnell MA, et al. (2013) Morbidity and mortality of octogenarians following open radical cystectomy using a standardized reporting system. Can J Urol 20: 6826-6831.
  49. Mendiola FP, Zorn KC, Gofrit, ON, Mikhail AA, Orvieto MA, et al. (2007) Cystectomy in the ninth decade: operative results and long-term survival outcomes. Can J Urol 14: 3628-3634.
  50. Clément C, Rossi P, Aissi K, Barthelemy P, Guibert N, et al. (2011) Incidence, Risk Profile and Morphological Pattern of Lower Extremity Venous Thromboembolism After Urological Cancer Surgery. J Urol 186: 2293-2297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. juro.2011.07.074
  51. Cárdenas Turanzas M, Cooksley C, Kamat AM, Pettaway CA, Elting LS (2008) Gender and age differences in blood utilization and length of stay in radical cystectomy: a population-based study. Int Urol Nephrol 40: 893-899. https://doi. org/10.1007/s11255-008-9351-x
  52. Caglayan A, Akbulut Z, Atmaca AF, Altinova S, Kilic M, et al. (2012) Effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on pathological parameters and survival in patients undergoing radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Turk J Med Sci 42: 623-629.
  53. Wallis CJD, Magee DE, Satkunasivam R, Nam RK (2017b) Long-term incidence of venous thromboembolic events following cystectomy: A population-based analysis. J Urol 197: e28-e29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.02.140
  54. Blom, JW, Vanderschoot JPM, OostindiËR MJ, Osanto S,Van Der Meer FJM et al. (2006) Incidence of venous thrombosis in a large cohort of 66 329 cancer patients: results of a record linkage study. J Thromb Haemost 4: 529-535. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1538-7836.2006.01804.x
  55. Streiff MB, Holmstrom B, Ashrani A, Bockenstedt PL, Chesney C, et al. (2015) Cancer-associated venous thromboembolic disease, version 1.2015. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 13: 1079-1095. https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2015.0133
  56. Gopalakrishna A, Longo TA, Fantony JJ, Doshi U, Harrison MR, et al. (2016) High rates of venous thromboembolic events in patients undergoing systemic therapy for urothelial carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Urol Oncol 34: 407-414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.05.009
scroll up