OBJECTIVE: To assess the oncological safety of laparoscopic procedures for the management of urothelial carcinomas of the urinary tract. METHODS: Data on laparoscopic management of urothelial carcinomas in the literature were analysed using MEDLINE and by matching the following keywords: urological malignancies, upper tract tumours, bladder carcinomas, laparoscopic approach, recurrence, follow-up and metastasis site. RESULTS: Minimally invasive techniques are being used increasingly in the management of these tumours and successfully achieving the benefits of lower blood loss and more rapid patient recovery. To date, no evidence level 1 information is available and published series of these technically challenging cases are small and follow-up limited. Short to medium term follow-up appears encouraging in terms of recurrence and survival rates, but long-term data are immature compared to the established open techniques these procedures seek to duplicate. Specific concerns in terms of the oncologic safety of laparoscopy, especially with regard to the pneumoperitoneum, tumour manipulation and specimen extraction are addressed. Port-site metastases and tumour seeding are rare events and appear to be mainly related to the grade and stage of the tumour. Specific precautions are required to minimise these risks. CONCLUSION: Oncological results of the laparoscopic approach are difficult to compare with those of open surgery. However, recent series have not reported unusual tumour dissemination or a higher rate of recurrence with this approach. Laparoscopic techniques are not yet standard of care in invasive urothelial carcinomas. Long-term assessment is ongoing and awaited.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the oncological safety of laparoscopic procedures for the management of urothelial carcinomas of the urinary tract. METHODS: Data on laparoscopic management of urothelial carcinomas in the literature were analysed using MEDLINE and by matching the following keywords: urological malignancies, upper tract tumours, bladder carcinomas, laparoscopic approach, recurrence, follow-up and metastasis site. RESULTS: Minimally invasive techniques are being used increasingly in the management of these tumours and successfully achieving the benefits of lower blood loss and more rapid patient recovery. To date, no evidence level 1 information is available and published series of these technically challenging cases are small and follow-up limited. Short to medium term follow-up appears encouraging in terms of recurrence and survival rates, but long-term data are immature compared to the established open techniques these procedures seek to duplicate. Specific concerns in terms of the oncologic safety of laparoscopy, especially with regard to the pneumoperitoneum, tumour manipulation and specimen extraction are addressed. Port-site metastases and tumour seeding are rare events and appear to be mainly related to the grade and stage of the tumour. Specific precautions are required to minimise these risks. CONCLUSION: Oncological results of the laparoscopic approach are difficult to compare with those of open surgery. However, recent series have not reported unusual tumour dissemination or a higher rate of recurrence with this approach. Laparoscopic techniques are not yet standard of care in invasive urothelial carcinomas. Long-term assessment is ongoing and awaited.
Authors: Grégory Verhoest; Shahrokh F Shariat; Thomas F Chromecki; Jay D Raman; Vitaly Margulis; Giacomo Novara; Christian Seitz; Mesut Remzi; Morgan Rouprêt; Douglas S Scherr; Karim Bensalah Journal: World J Urol Date: 2011-06-17 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Simone Albisinni; Marco Oderda; Laurent Fossion; Virginia Varca; Jens Rassweiler; Xavier Cathelineau; Piotr Chlosta; Alexandre De la Taille; Franco Gaboardi; Thierry Piechaud; Peter Rimington; Laurent Salomon; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg; Dogu Teber; Roland Van Velthoven Journal: World J Urol Date: 2015-07-02 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Mario Alvarez-Maestro; Juan Gómez Rivas; Sergio Alonso Y Gregorio; Cristina de Castro Guerin; Ángel Tabernero Gómez; Jesús Cisneros Ledo Journal: Cent European J Urol Date: 2016-11-30