Literature DB >> 15947570

Is orthotopic bladder replacement the new gold standard? Evidence from a systematic review.

G Nabi1, S M Yong, E Ong, G McPherson, A Grant, J N'Dow.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: In this systematic review we determined whether the outcome of orthotopic bladder replacement is superior to that of continent and incontinent urinary diversion.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library from January 1990 to January 2003. A total of 3,370 abstracts were reviewed, including all types of studies from prospective, randomized, controlled studies to small, retrospective series. All relevant articles with at least 10 patients and a mean followup of at least 1 year were retrieved. There were no language restrictions. NonEnglish articles were translated. Comparisons were made between the major surgery types, including ileal conduit, continent diversion, bladder reconstruction and bladder replacement. All studies were scored using a predetermined quality assessment checklist to assess internal validity (bias and confounding) and external validity.
RESULTS: A total of 405 studies met inclusion criteria. There were 32 prospective and 373 retrospective studies describing a total of 32,795 patients. The majority of studies were incompletely or poorly described and outcomes were often not defined. When they were defined, definitions varied. In clinical outcomes ileal conduit diversions had the lowest operative complications rate but highest reported postoperative morbidity. They also had a higher reported incidence of symptomatic urinary tract infections. The rates of postoperative morbidity, mortality and need for reoperation varied widely among studies even for the same procedure. Of physiological outcomes metabolic acidosis was the most commonly reported metabolic complication in patients with various urinary diversions. The quality of the reported literature was poor. There were no studies of the health economic implications of performing 1 type of surgery vs another type.
CONCLUSIONS: While enthusiasts regard orthotopic bladder replacement as the new gold standard when lower urinary tract function must be replaced, the level and quality of current evidence are poor. The immediate concern must be to rectify this paucity of evidence with well designed and well reported prospective studies, ideally in a randomized setting, comparing the various major forms of urinary diversion and bladder replacement surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15947570     DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000162021.24730.4f

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  9 in total

1.  Elevated urinary cytokine levels in patients undergoing ileal neobladder replacement compared with sigmoid neobladder replacement.

Authors:  Yuzo Nakano; Hideaki Miyake; Taka-Aki Inoue; Atsushi Takenaka; Isao Hara; Masato Fujisawa
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2007-02-20       Impact factor: 2.370

2.  Determining when to recommend continent urinary diversion.

Authors:  Scott M Gilbert; James E Montie
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 1.862

3.  Variation in performance of candidate surgical quality measures for muscle-invasive bladder cancer by hospital type.

Authors:  Anthony T Corcoran; Elizabeth Handorf; Daniel Canter; Jeffrey J Tomaszewski; Justin E Bekelman; Simon P Kim; Robert G Uzzo; Alexander Kutikov; Marc C Smaldone
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2014-07-14       Impact factor: 5.588

Review 4.  Disease burden of overactive bladder: quality-of-life data assessed using ICI-recommended instruments.

Authors:  Ramandeep Basra; Con Kelleher
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 5.  Urinary diversion and bladder reconstruction/replacement using intestinal segments for intractable incontinence or following cystectomy.

Authors:  June D Cody; Ghulam Nabi; Norman Dublin; Samuel McClinton; David E Neal; Robert Pickard; Sze M Yong
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-02-15

6.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of two kinds of bladder cancer urinary diversion: Studer versus Bricker.

Authors:  Weipu Mao; Jinbo Xie; Yuan Wu; Zonglin Wu; Keyi Wang; Heng Shi; Hui Zhang; Bo Peng; Jiang Geng
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2020-06

Review 7.  [Urinary diversions: which one one is right for which patient?].

Authors:  P Bader; D Westermann; D Frohneberg
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 0.639

8.  Recovering from Cystectomy: Patient Perspectives.

Authors:  Carmit K McMullen; Marilyn L Kwan; Janice C Colwell; Julie R Munneke; James V Davis; Alison Firemark; Neon Brooks; Marcia Grant; Scott M Gilbert; Andrea Altschuler
Journal:  Bladder Cancer       Date:  2019-01-31

9.  Update on the management of invasive bladder cancer 2012.

Authors:  Hans Goethuys; Hein Van Poppel
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2012-07-18       Impact factor: 3.989

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.