Literature DB >> 10590359

Rationale for bladder-sparing surgery in patients with locally advanced colorectal carcinoma.

M D Balbay1, J W Slaton, N Trane, J Skibber, C P Dinney.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Total pelvic exenteration (TPE) with urinary diversion is a standard surgical approach for patients with locally advanced rectal carcinoma. Because only approximately 50% of patients undergoing TPE have tumor involving the bladder, the authors evaluated the feasibility of bladder salvage in this setting. The current study presents the results of a retrospective study of patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma (classification of >/= T3) to formulate criteria for selecting patients for bladder-sparing procedures.
METHODS: The charts of 81 patients with rectal carcinoma classified as >/= T3 were reviewed for age, gender, computed tomography (CT) findings, results of intraoperative examination under anesthesia, final pathologic evaluation, urologic complications, local recurrence, and patient survival.
RESULTS: Among the 46 patients who underwent TPE, final pathologic evaluation demonstrated tumor involvement of the bladder in 58% of patients. Preoperative identification of a bladder mucosal abnormality accurately predicted bladder involvement in only 57% of the 30 patients who underwent cystoscopy. CT and intraoperative palpation of the bladder individually predicted the final pathologic findings in 69% and 70% of patients, respectively; of the 21 patients in whom both were positive, 90% had bladder involvement. Of the 35 patients (26 females and 9 males) who underwent bladder-sparing procedures, 22 had complete sparing of the bladder, 9 underwent partial cystectomy (5 with ureteroneocystostomy), 4 underwent ureteroneocystostomy alone, and 2 underwent prostatectomy alone. Ninety-four percent of these 35 patients had negative histologic margins. There was no difference in the incidence rate of urinary complications between patients who underwent TPE and those who underwent a bladder-sparing surgery (17% each). The incidence rates of local recurrence (14% vs. 17%) and the 3-year survival rates (49% vs. 39%) did not differ significantly between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Bladder-sparing surgery to treat patients with locally invasive colorectal carcinoma provides good local control without sacrificing survival. Women, whose reproductive organs act as a natural barrier, and selected men in whom CT and intraoperative evaluation identify only localized involvement of the prostate or bladder appear to be reasonable candidates for bladder-sparing procedures. Copyright 1999 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10590359     DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19991201)86:11<2212::aid-cncr6>3.0.co;2-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  8 in total

1.  Bladder Invasion in Patients with Advanced Colorectal Carcinoma.

Authors:  Rajendra B Nerli; Shridhar C Ghagane; Prasanna Ram; S S Shimikore; Kumar Vinchurkar; Murigendra B Hiremath
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2018-07-23

2.  Bladder Reconstruction and Diversion during Colorectal Surgery.

Authors:  Scott E Delacroix; J C Winters
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2010-06

3.  En bloc urinary bladder resection for locally advanced colorectal cancer: a 17-year experience.

Authors:  Jimmy C M Li; Charing C N Chong; Simon S M Ng; Raymond Y C Yiu; Janet F Y Lee; Ka Lau Leung
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2011-04-28       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Bladder-sparing extended resection of locally advanced rectal cancer involving the prostate and seminal vesicles.

Authors:  Norio Saito; Takanori Suzuki; Masanori Sugito; Masaaki Ito; Akihiro Kobayashi; Toshiyuki Tanaka; Masahito Kotaka; Hirokazu Karaki; Takaya Kobatake; Yoshiyuki Tsunoda; Akio Shiomi; Masaaki Yano; Nozomi Minagawa; Yuji Nishizawa
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2007-09-26       Impact factor: 2.549

5.  [Cystectomy for indications other than bladder cancer].

Authors:  S Hautmann; K-H Felix-Chun; E Currlin; M G Friedrich; J Dose Schwarz; T Langwieler; S Conrad; H Huland
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 0.639

6.  Outcome of urinary bladder recurrence after partial cystectomy for en bloc urinary bladder adherent colorectal cancer resection.

Authors:  Hao Lun Luo; Kai Lung Tsai; Shung Eing Lin; Po Hui Chiang
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2013-04-12       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Efficacy of an additional flap operation in bladder-preserving surgery with radical prostatectomy and cystourethral anastomosis for rectal cancer involving the prostate.

Authors:  Keita Noguchi; Yuji Nishizawa; Yoshinobu Komai; Yasuyuki Sakai; Akihiro Kobayasi; Masaaki Ito; Norio Saito
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2017-03-04       Impact factor: 2.549

8.  Combined radical prostatectomy and abdominoperineal resection for locally invasive rectal cancer.

Authors:  Daniel Fernández-Martínez; Antonio Rodríguez-Infante; Elsa Castelo-Álvarez; Iván Fernández-Vega; Miguel Suárez-Hevia; Nuria Truán-Alonso; Ricardo F Baldonedo-Cernuda; José A Alvarez-Pérez; Herminio Sánchez-Farpón
Journal:  Int J Surg Case Rep       Date:  2014-06-05
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.