Prevalence and Prognostic Significance of Preoperative Anemia in Radical Cystectomy Patients: A Multicenter Retrospective Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and objective Preoperative anemia is common in patients undergoing radical cystectomy for bladder cancer, but its prevalence and impact on outcomes remain poorly characterized across different health care settings. This study aims to assess the prevalence of preoperative anemia, evaluate its current management practices, and determine its association with postoperative and oncological outcomes in patients undergoing radical cystectomy. Methods We retrospectively analyzed 4886 patients with nonmetastatic bladder cancer who underwent radical cystectomy across 28 centers in 13 countries. Multivariable regression models identified the predictors of preoperative hemoglobin levels and postoperative blood transfusions. Survival outcomes were assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses. Key findings and limitations Preoperative anemia was present in 44% of women and 48% of men. Among anemic patients, 73% received no blood management interventions. Higher hemoglobin levels before transurethral resection of a bladder tumor correlated with higher levels before cystectomy and fewer postoperative blood transfusions (odds ratio: 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.97–0.99, p < 0.001). Higher preoperative hemoglobin levels were associated with lower 90-d mortality rates (hazard ratio: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.97–0.99, p < 0.001) and independently predicted reduced all-cause mortality, cancer-specific mortality, and disease relapse. Conclusions and clinical implications Preoperative anemia is prevalent and undertreated in patients undergoing radical cystectomy, and is independently associated with adverse perioperative and oncological outcomes. This highlights the need for further research regarding the potential benefits of implementing systematic preoperative anemia management. Patient summary This study found that low blood counts before bladder removal surgery are common, often untreated, and linked to worse outcomes. Early treatment of low blood counts before surgery could improve results for patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".