International Urology and Nephrology

, Volume 50, Issue 10, pp 1771–1778 | Cite as

Are there any metastases to the chest in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer patients on follow-up computed tomography?

  • Hiroshi JuriEmail author
  • Mitsuhiro Koyama
  • Haruhito Azuma
  • Yoshifumi Narumi
Urology - Original Paper



The purpose of the study was to retrospectively determine whether there are metastases to the chest in patients with primary non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma in the bladder on the follow-up computed tomography (CT).


We analyzed 328 patients with follow-up chest CT for urothelial carcinoma of the bladder diagnosed between January 2004 and September 2013. We divided patients into four groups: Ta (n = 74), T1 (n = 78), carcinoma in situ (CIS, n = 25), and ≥ T2 (n = 151). We used the chest CT to determine whether there were positive findings of metastasis. Univariate and multivariate analyses were achieved using categories of T stage, histological grade, multifocal lesions, and recurrence.


On univariate analysis, there were significant differences on T stage (p < 0.001) and histological grade (p = 0.001), and there was no significant difference on multifocal lesions (p = 0.11) and recurrence (p = 0.34). Positive findings of metastases were observed in 1.4% (1/74) of the Ta patients, 0% (0/78) of the T1 patients, 8.0% (2/25) of the patients with carcinoma in situ (CIS), and 27.2% (41/151) of the ≥ T2 patients (p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, T staging was independent variable for positive findings of metastasis (Odds ratio; 2.84, 95% Confidence Interval; 1.65–4.89). In contrast, histological grade, multifocal lesions, and recurrence were not independent variables.


T stage would affect to metastasis to the chest. It might be appropriate to omit chest CT in patients with Ta or T1 without upstaging in the course of follow-up. We may suggest that the follow-up chest CT in patients with CIS.


Bladder cancer Metastasis Chest CT Follow-up 



We were not supported by any sources of financial grants or other funding.

Author contributions

HJ: data collection, data analysis, manuscript writing. MK: data collection. HA: manuscript editing. YN: manuscript editing

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study, formal consent is not required.


  1. 1.
    Shinagare AB, Ramaiya NH, Jagannathan JP, Fennessy FM, Taplin M, Abbeele AD (2011) Metastatic pattern of bladder cancer: correlation with the characteristics of the primary tumor. AJR 196:117–122CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rajesh A, Sokhi H, Fung R, Mulcahy KA, Bankart MJ (2011) Role of whole-body staging computed tomographic scans for detecting distant metastases in patients with bladder cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr 35:402–405CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pano B, Sebastia C, Ripoll E, Parades P, Salvador R, Bunesch L et al (2011) Pathways of lymjphatic spread in male urogenital pelvic malignancies. Radiographics 31:135–160CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sano T, Hamada S, Haitani T, Nakashima M, Kajita Y, Shichiri Y (2013) Lung metastasis of Ta bladder cancer: a case report and literature review. Korean J Urol 54:271–273CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Koh KB, Rogawski K, Smith PH (1994) Cavitating pulmonary metastases from superficial transitional cell carcinoma of urinary bladder: case report. Scand J Urol Nephrol 28:201–202CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dougherty WD, Gonsorcik VK, Harpster LE, Trussell JC, Drabick JJ (2009) Superficial bladder cancer metastatic to the lungs: two case reports and review of the literature. Urology 73:210 e3–e5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kakei Y, Nishio Y, Hashimura T, Takeuchi H, Yoshida O (1992) Clinicopathological analysis on invasion and metastasis in superficial bladder cancer. Hinyoukika Kiyo 38:783–788Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Soiess PE, Agarwal N, Bangs R, Boorjian SA, Buyyounouski MK, Clark PE et al (2017) Bladder Cancer, Version 5. 2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 15:1240–1267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Alfred Witjes J, Lebret T, Comperat EM, Cowan NC, De Santis M, Bruins HM et al (2017) Updated 2016 EAU guidelines on muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer. Eur Urol 71:462–475CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bellmunt J, Orsola A, Leow JJ, Wiegel T, De Santis M, Horwich A (2014) Bladder cancer: ESMO Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 25(Suppl 3):iii40–iii48CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kubota Y, Nakagawa N (2016) Essential content of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for bladder cancer: the Japanese Urological Association 2015 update. Int J Urol 23:640–645CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Horan G, Rafique A, Robson J, Dixon AK, Williams MV (2007) CT of the chest can hinder the management of seminoma of the testis; it detects irrelevant abnormalities. Br J Cancer 96:882–885CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sella T, Rosenbaum E, Edelmann DZ, Agid R, Bloom AI, Libson E (2001) Value of chest CT scans in routine ovarian carcinoma follow-up. AJR 177:857–859CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shumsky AG, Stuart GCE, Brasher PM, Nation JG, Robertson DI, Sangkarat S (1994) An evaluation of routine follow-up of patients treated for endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 55:229–233CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Domimic HT, Sam SC (2015) Management of carcinoma in situ of the bladder: Best practice and recent developments. Ther Adv Urol 7:351–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tilki D, Reich O, Svatek RS, Karakiewicz PI, Kassouf W, Novara G et al (2010) Characteristics and outcomes of patients with clinical carcinoma in situ only treated with radical cystectomy: an international study of 243 patients. J Urol 184:464–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Babaian RJ, Johnson DE, Llamas L, Ayala AG (1980) Metastases from transitional cell carcinoma of urinary bladder. Urology 16:142–144CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Van der Pol CB, Sahni VA, Ederhaedt SC, Oto A, Akin O, Alexander LF et al American College of Radiology. ACR appropriateness criteria revised 2017. Pretreatment staging for muscle-invasive bladder cancer.
  19. 19.
    Kakinuma R, Ohmatsu H, Kaneko M, Kusumoto M, Yoshida J, Nagai K et al (2004) Progression of focal pure ground-glass opacity detected by low-dose helical computed tomography screening for lung cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr 28:17–23CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of RadiologyOsaka Medical CollegeTakatsukiJapan
  2. 2.Department of UrologyOsaka Medical CollegeTakatsukiJapan

Personalised recommendations