Back to Authors

Palou, Joan

A5033224206 | I123044942

Mayo Clinic

Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

Citations 5

Reply by Authors

Journal of Urology | April 7, 2023 | Volume: 209 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 900-900

10.1097/ju.0000000000003195.02 | PMID 37026638

Safety, Tolerability, and Preliminary Efficacy of TAR-200 in Patients With Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer Who Refused or Were Unfit for Curative-intent Therapy: A Phase 1 Study

Journal of Urology | April 7, 2023 | Volume: 209 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 890-900

10.1097/ju.0000000000003195 | PMID 37026631

Salvage Radical Prostatectomy for Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Morbidity and Functional Outcomes from a Large Multicenter Series of Open versus Robotic Approaches

Journal of Urology | May 10, 2019 | Volume: 202 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 725-731

10.1097/ju.0000000000000327 | PMID 31075058

The impact of re‐transurethral resection on clinical outcomes in a large multicentre cohort of patients with T1 high‐grade/Grade 3 bladder cancer treated with bacille Calmette–Guérin

BJU International | October 15, 2015 | Volume: 118 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 44-52

10.1111/bju.13354 | PMID 26469362

Objectives To determine if a re‐transurethral resection (TUR), in the presence or absence of muscle at the first TUR in patients with T1‐high grade (HG)/Grade 3 (G3) bladder cancer, makes a difference in recurrence, progression, cancer specific (CSS) and overall survival (OS). Patients and methods In a large retrospective multicentre cohort of 2451 patients with T1‐HG/G3 initially treated with bacille Calmette–Guérin, 935 (38%) had a re‐TUR. According to the presence or absence of muscle in the specimen of the primary TUR, patients were divided in four groups: group 1 (no muscle, no re‐TUR), group 2 (no muscle, re‐TUR), group 3 (muscle, no re‐TUR) and group 4 (muscle, re‐TUR). Clinical outcomes were compared across the four groups. Results Re‐TUR had a positive impact on recurrence, progression, CSS and OS only if muscle was not present in the primary TUR specimen. Adjusting for the most important prognostic factors, re‐TUR in the absence of muscle had a borderline significant effect on time to recurrence [hazard ratio (HR) 0.67, P = 0.08], progression (HR 0.46, P = 0.06), CSS (HR 0.31, P = 0.07) and OS (HR 0.48, P = 0.05). Re‐TUR in the presence of muscle in the primary TUR specimen did not improve the outcome for any of the endpoints. Conclusions Our retrospective analysis suggests that re‐TUR may not be necessary in patients with T1‐HG/G3, if muscle is present in the specimen of the primary TUR.
Surgical Margin Status After Robot Assisted Radical Cystectomy: Results From the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium

Journal of Urology | May 18, 2010 | Volume: 184 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 87-91

10.1016/j.juro.2010.03.037 | PMID 20478596