Rahul Dutta
University of California, Irvine
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Rahul Dutta.
Arab journal of urology | 2016
Jeremy W. Martin; Estrella M. Carballido; Ahmed Ahmed; Bilal Farhan; Rahul Dutta; Cody Smith; Ramy F. Youssef
Abstract Objective: To highlight the current understanding of the epidemiology, clinicopathological characteristics, and management of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the bladder, as it accounts for 2–5% of bladder tumours, with a focus on non-bilharzial-associated SCC (NB-SCC). The standard treatment for bladder SCC remains radical cystectomy (RC). We present an updated clinical profile of bladder SCC and a review of NB-SCC therapeutic approaches, including RC, neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatments, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy. Methods: Using search terms relating to SCC, urinary bladder, and treatment modalities, we performed a search of the PubMed and Embase databases to identify NB-SCC treatment approaches and outcomes. Peer-reviewed English language reports from 1975 to present assessing SCC management were included. Two authors independently screened and extracted the data. Results: Of the 806 articles screened, 10 met the pre-defined inclusion criteria. RC was performed in seven of the 10 studies. Although radiotherapy alone yielded poor outcomes, preoperative radiotherapy and RC were associated with improved survival. There is little evidence supporting the use of chemotherapy in NB-SCC, and its efficacy in relation to RC is not known. Conclusion: Based on current literature, there is insufficient evidence to provide a treatment recommendation for NB-SCC. Whilst RC is the standard of care, the role of preoperative radiotherapy should be revisited and compared to RC alone. Additional studies incorporating multimodal approaches, contemporary radiation techniques, and systemic therapies are warranted. Immunotherapy as a treatment for bladder SCC has yet to be investigated.
Urologic Oncology-seminars and Original Investigations | 2016
Rahul Dutta; Ahmed Abdelhalim; Jeremy W. Martin; Simone L. Vernez; Bishoy Faltas; Yair Lotan; Ramy F. Youssef
PURPOSE To investigate the prognostic significance of tumor location on survival outcomes in patients with urinary bladder adenocarcinoma (BAC). METHODS We retrospectively analyzed cases of BAC with known tumor location from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database from 1973 to 2012. Data regarding patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and oncological and survival outcomes were collected. Patients were subgrouped according to tumor location into urachal/dome (dome and urachus [UD]), lateral wall (anterior, posterior, and lateral bladder walls [LW]), and base (trigone, ureteral orifices, and bladder neck [BL]). RESULTS A total of 1,361 cases of BAC with known tumor location were identified. More UD tumors were low grade (grade I and II; 51%) than LW (33%) and BL (43%) tumors (P<0.0001). UD lesions were the most likely to have metastatic spread (23% vs. 17% for LW and 15% for BL) (P<0.0001). The 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) rates were 37.3% and 49.0%, respectively, for all BAC. Furthermore, the 5-year OS rates were 42.3%, 35.9%, and 28.4% for UD, LW, and BL lesions, respectively (P<0.0001), whereas the 5-year DSS rates were 50.2%, 51.7%, and 42.1% for UD, LW, and BL lesions, respectively (P = 0.0097). Multivariate Cox regression analysis controlling for tumor stage and grade demonstrated that both tumors of the LW (hazards ratio [HR] = 1.52 for OS and 1.30 for DSS) and BL (HR = 1.71 for OS and 1.57 for DSS) conferred a worse prognosis relative to those of the UD (P< 0.05). CONCLUSIONS Tumor location of BAC is an independent prognostic factor for disease outcome. Our results suggest that the urachal and dome locations are associated with relatively favorable survival and oncological outcomes, whereas basal location confers poorer outcomes.
Journal of Endourology | 2016
Rahul Dutta; Zhamshid Okhunov; Simone L. Vernez; Kamaljot Kaler; Anjalie T. Gulati; Ramy F. Youssef; K. Nelson; Yair Lotan; Jaime Landman
PURPOSE To compare the costs associated with ultrasound (US)-guided hospital-based (UGHB), CT-guided hospital-based (CTG), and US-guided office-based (UGOB) percutaneous renal biopsy (PRB) for small renal masses (SRMs). METHODS We retrospectively analyzed patient demographics, tumor characteristics, R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry scores, and cost data of patients undergoing PRB for SRM at our institution from May 2012 to September 2015. Cost data, including facility costs, professional fees, and pathology, were obtained from the departments of urology, radiology, and pathology. RESULTS A total of 78 patients were included in our analysis: 19, 31, and 28 UGHB, CTG, and UGOB, respectively. There was no difference in age, gender distribution, or tumor size among the three groups (p-values 0.131, 0.241, and 0.603, respectively). UGOB tumors had lower R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry scores (p=0.008). There were no differences in nondiagnostic rates between the UGHB, CTG, and UGOB groups [4 (21%), 5 (16%), and 6 (21%)] (p=0.852). There were no differences in final tumor treatment strategies utilized among the UGHB, CTG, and UGOB groups (p=0.447). There were 0, 2 (6%), and 0 complications in the UGHB, CTG, and UGOB biopsy groups. Total facility costs were
Abdominal Radiology | 2016
Brian C. Jung; Ngoc-Anh Tran; Sadhna Verma; Rahul Dutta; Paul Tung; Michael Mousa; Eduardo Hernandez-Rangel; Megha Nayyar; Chandana Lall
3449,
The Journal of Urology | 2017
Simone L. Vernez; Zhamshid Okhunov; Jamie Wikenheiser; Cyrus Khoyilar; Rahul Dutta; Kathryn Osann; Kamaljot Kaler; Thomas K. Lee; Ralph V. Clayman; Jaime Landman
3280, and
Urology | 2017
Simone L. Vernez; Zhamshid Okhunov; Kamaljot Kaler; Ramy F. Youssef; Rahul Dutta; Arkadiy Palvanov; Paras Shah; Kathryn Osann; David N. Siegel; Igor Lobko; Louis R. Kavoussi; Ralph V. Clayman; Jaime Landman
1056 for UGHB, CTG, and UGOB PRB, respectively (p<0.0001). There was no difference between the urologists and radiologists professional fees (p=0.066). Total costs, including facility costs, pathology fees, and professional fees, were
The Journal of Urology | 2017
Rahul Dutta; Jeremy W. Martin; Simone L. Vernez; Ahmed Abdelhalim; Ahmed A. Shokeir; Hassan Abol-Enein; Ahmed Mosbah; Mohamed Ghoneim; Ramy F. Youssef
4598,
The Journal of Urology | 2017
Ramy F. Youssef; Jeremy W. Martin; Khashayar Sakhaee; John Poindexter; Simone L. Vernez; Rahul Dutta; Charles D. Scales; Glenn M. Preminger; Michael E. Lipkin
4470, and
The Journal of Urology | 2017
Renai Yoon; Rahul Dutta; Roshan M. Patel; Kyle Spradling; Zhamshid Okhunov; William Sohn; Hak Jong Lee; Jaime Landman; Ralph V. Clayman
2129 for UGHB, CTG, and UGOB renal biopsy, respectively (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION For select patients with less anatomically complex, exophytic, and posteriorly located tumors, UGOB PRB provides equivalent diagnostic and complication rates while being significantly more cost-effective than either UGHB or CTG renal biopsy.
The Journal of Urology | 2016
Zhamshid Okhunov; Thomas Tailly; Giulio Patruno; Simone L. Vernez; Rahul Dutta; Stephanie Fukawa; Harwood Garland; Samuel Juncal; Renai Yoon; Kamaljot Kaler; Ramy F. Youssef; Elspeth McDougal; Mark L. Jordan; Jaime Landman; Ralph V. Clayman
Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a condition in which the weakness of the pelvic floor muscles causes unintentional loss of urine. For patients who are unable to achieve symptomatic improvement from lifestyle modification and pharmacotherapy, surgical placement of the pelvic slings or the use of urethral bulking agents has been shown to provide tremendous symptomatic improvement. Learning to recognize the pelvic slings and to identify their complications on imaging is invaluable; however, this is challenging because of the change in the local anatomy after surgical placement of the sling. In this paper, we present CT and MR imaging to demonstrate the surgical and non-surgical treatments of female SUI and their complications. Through this pictorial essay, our goal is to familiarize radiologists with recognizing the various forms of treatment for SUIs, the relevant pelvic anatomy, and complications that may occur secondary to the surgical placement of the pelvic slings.