D A Husmann1, S R Rathbun. 1. Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester MN 55905, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the risk of bladder cancer following enteric bladder augmentation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients followed for care after an enteric bladder augmentation have been entered into a registry; individuals followed for a minimum of 10 years were evaluated. RESULTS: The study criteria were met by 153 patients. Indications for bladder augmentation were neurogenic bladder in 97, exstrophy in 38 and posterior urethral valves in 18. There was a median follow-up interval of 27 years (range 10-53). A total of seven cases of malignancy developed. Median time to tumor development following augmentation was 32 years (range 22-52). Two patients with neurogenic bladder developed transitional cell carcinoma; both were heavy smokers (>50 pack per year history). Two patients with a history of posterior urethral valves and renal transplantation developed adenocarcinoma of the enteric augment. Three patients with bladder exstrophy developed multifocal adenocarcinoma of the augmented bladder. Two patients remain alive, 5 and 6 years following radical cystoprostatectomy; five died of cancer-specific causes. CONCLUSIONS: Malignancy following enteric bladder augmentation arose in 4.5% (7/153) of our patients and was associated with coexisting carcinogenic stimuli (prolonged tobacco/chronic immunosuppressive exposure), or alternatively with the inherent risk of malignancy existing with bladder exstrophy.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the risk of bladder cancer following enteric bladder augmentation. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients followed for care after an enteric bladder augmentation have been entered into a registry; individuals followed for a minimum of 10 years were evaluated. RESULTS: The study criteria were met by 153 patients. Indications for bladder augmentation were neurogenic bladder in 97, exstrophy in 38 and posterior urethral valves in 18. There was a median follow-up interval of 27 years (range 10-53). A total of seven cases of malignancy developed. Median time to tumor development following augmentation was 32 years (range 22-52). Two patients with neurogenic bladder developed transitional cell carcinoma; both were heavy smokers (>50 pack per year history). Two patients with a history of posterior urethral valves and renal transplantation developed adenocarcinoma of the enteric augment. Three patients with bladder exstrophy developed multifocal adenocarcinoma of the augmented bladder. Two patients remain alive, 5 and 6 years following radical cystoprostatectomy; five died of cancer-specific causes. CONCLUSIONS:Malignancy following enteric bladder augmentation arose in 4.5% (7/153) of our patients and was associated with coexisting carcinogenic stimuli (prolonged tobacco/chronic immunosuppressive exposure), or alternatively with the inherent risk of malignancy existing with bladder exstrophy.
Authors: John S Wiener; Nina Huck; Anne-Sophie Blais; Mandy Rickard; Armando Lorenzo; Heather N McCaffrey Di Carlo; Margaret G Mueller; Raimund Stein Journal: World J Urol Date: 2020-04-23 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: T Kälble; I Hofmann; J W Thüroff; R Stein; R Hautmann; H Riedmiller; D Vergho; L Hertle; C Wülfing; M Truß; S Roth; F C von Rundstedt; P Albers; J Gschwend; K Herkommer; U Humke; M Spahn; P Bader; J Steffens; R Harzmann; C G Stief; A Karl; S C Müller; M Waldner; J Noldus; K Kleinschmidt; P Alken; B Kopper; M Fisch; A Lampel; A Stenzel; J Fichtner; B Flath; H Rübben; K P Juenemann; S Hautmann; A Knipper; D Leusmann; W Strohmaier; W F Thon; S Miller; K Weingärtner; A Schilling; H Piechota; J E Becht; H Schwaibold; P Bub; S Conrad; U Wenderoth; W Merkle; W Rösch; T Otto; B Ulshöfer; M Westenfelder Journal: Urologe A Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 0.639
Authors: Abhishek Seth; Yeun Goo Chung; Eun Seok Gil; Duong Tu; Debra Franck; Dolores Di Vizio; Rosalyn M Adam; David L Kaplan; Carlos R Estrada; Joshua R Mauney Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2013-03-29 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: Duong D Tu; Yeun Goo Chung; Eun Seok Gil; Abhishek Seth; Debra Franck; Vivian Cristofaro; Maryrose P Sullivan; Dolores Di Vizio; Pablo Gomez; Rosalyn M Adam; David L Kaplan; Carlos R Estrada; Joshua R Mauney Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2013-08-13 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: Raimund Stein; Markus Hohenfellner; Sascha Pahernik; Stephan Roth; Joachim W Thüroff; Herbert Rübben Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2012-09-21 Impact factor: 5.594