Practice Patterns Regarding Female Reproductive Organ-Sparing and Nerve-Sparing Radical Cystectomy Among Urologic Oncologists in the United States

We conducted a survey of US urologic oncologists to assess provider practice patterns regarding female repro-ductive organ-sparing (ROS) and nerve-sparing radical cystectomy (RC) in pre-and postmenopausal patients with organ-confined disease. We identified significant gaps in adoption of female ROS and nerve-sparing techniques. Future efforts should increase training and education in this area among urologists to optimize female RC outcomes. Background: Female reproductive organ-sparing (ROS) and nerve-sparing radical cystectomy (RC) techniques have been shown to be oncologically safe and to improve sexual function outcomes among select patients with organ -confined disease. We sought to characterize practice patterns regarding female ROS and nerve-sparing RC among US urologists. Patients and Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of members of the Society of Urologic Oncology to assess provider-reported frequency of ROS and nerve-sparing RC in premenopausal and postmenopausal patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer that failed intravesical therapy or clinically localized muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Results: Among 101 urologists, 80 (79.2%) reported that they routinely resect the uterus/cervix, 68 (67.3%) the neurovascular bundle, 49 (48.5%) the ovaries, and 19 (18.8%) a portion of the vagina when performing RC in premenopausal patients with organ-confined disease. When asked about changes to approach in postmenopausal patients, 71 participants (70.3%) reported that they were less likely to spare the uterus/cervix, 44 (43.6%) were less likely to spare the neurovascular bundle, 70 (69.3%) were less likely to spare the ovaries, and 23 (22.8%) were less likely to spare a portion of the vagina. Conclusion: We identified significant gaps in adoption of female ROS and nerve-sparing RC techniques for patients with organ-confined disease, despite evidence that ROS and nerve-sparing techniques are oncologically safe and can optimize functional outcomes in select patients. Future efforts should improve provider training in and education about ROS and nerve-sparing RC to improve postoperative outcomes among female patients.