Literature DB >> 25577131

Fifteen-year single-centre experience with three different surgical procedures of nerve-sparing cystectomy in selected organ-confined bladder cancer patients.

R Colombo1, F Pellucchi2, M Moschini3, A Gallina1, R Bertini1, A Salonia1, P Rigatti1, F Montorsi1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate technical feasibility and oncologic and functional outcomes of three different surgical procedures of nerve-sparing radical cystectomy (NS-RC) for the treatment of organ-confined bladder cancer at a single referral centre.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: All consecutive cases of NS-RC carried out between 1997 and 2012 were retrospectively analysed. NS-RC included nerve-sparing cysto-vesicleprostatectomy (NS-CVP), capsule-sparing cystectomy (CS-C) and seminal-sparing cysto-prostatectomy (SS-CP). Peri-operative parameters and post-operative outcomes were analysed.
RESULTS: Overall, 90 patients underwent NS-RC, 35 (38.9 %) of whom received a NS-CVP, while 36 (40 %) and 19 (21.1 %) underwent capsule CS-C and SS-CP, respectively. No difference was registered comparing oncologic outcomes of the three different techniques; however, two local recurrences after CS-C were attributed to the surgical technique. Complete post-operative daytime and night-time urinary continence (UC) at 24 and 48 months was achieved in 94.4 and 74.4 % and in 88.8 and 84.4 % of cases, respectively. CS-C showed both the best UC and sexual function preservation rate at early follow-up (24 months). Overall, a satisfactory post-operative erectile function (IIEF-5 ≥ 22) was proved in 57 (68.6 %) and 54 (65.0 %) patients at 24 and 48 months, respectively. Significant difference was found when comparing sexual function preservation rate of NS-CVP (28.5 %) to that of CS-C (91.6 %) and SS-CP (84.2 %).
CONCLUSION: NS-RC for male patients accounted for 7.4 % of overall radical cystectomy. To a limited extent of the selected organ-confined bladder cancers treated, the three different procedures analysed showed comparable results in terms of local recurrence and cancer-specific survival. Both CS-C and SS-CP procedures provided excellent functional outcomes when compared to original NS-CVP.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cancer-specific survival; Capsule sparing; Intrafascial prostatectomy; Nerve sparing; Radical cystectomy; Sexual function; Urinary incontinence

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25577131     DOI: 10.1007/s00345-015-1482-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Urol        ISSN: 0724-4983            Impact factor:   4.226


  30 in total

1.  Re: Richard E. Hautmann, Oliver Hautmann, Börn G. Volkmer, Stefan Hautmann. Nerve-sparing radical cystectomy: a new technique. Eur Urol Suppl 2010;9:428-432.

Authors:  Paolo Puppo; Angelo Naselli
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2010-06-02       Impact factor: 20.096

2.  Prostate capsule sparing radical cystectomy: oncologic safety and clinical outcome.

Authors:  Laurence Klotz
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2009-04

3.  The potency-sparing radical cystectomy: does it compromise the completeness of the cancer resection?

Authors:  T R Pritchett; W M Schiff; E Klatt; G Lieskovsky; D G Skinner
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1988-12       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Prostate sparing cystectomy for bladder cancer: 20-year single center experience.

Authors:  Laura S Mertens; Richard P Meijer; Remco R de Vries; Jakko A Nieuwenhuijzen; Henk G van der Poel; Axel Bex; Bas W G van Rhijn; Wim Meinhardt; Simon Horenblas
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2013-11-25       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  Overall clinical outcomes after nerve and seminal sparing radical cystectomy for the treatment of organ confined bladder cancer.

Authors:  Renzo Colombo; Roberto Bertini; Andrea Salonia; Richard Naspro; Massimo Ghezzi; Bruno Mazzoccoli; Federico Deho'; Francesco Montorsi; Patrizio Rigatti
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Potency preserving cystectomy with intrafascial prostatectomy for high risk superficial bladder cancer.

Authors:  Paolo Puppo; Carlo Introini; Franco Bertolotto; Angelo Naselli
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2008-03-17       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Urinary functional outcome following radical cystoprostatectomy and ileal neobladder reconstruction in male patients.

Authors:  Hamed Ahmadi; Eila C Skinner; Vannita Simma-Chiang; Gus Miranda; Jie Cai; David F Penson; Siamak Daneshmand
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-11-15       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Laparoscopic nerve- and seminal-sparing cystectomy with orthotopic ileal neobladder: the first three cases.

Authors:  Giorgio Guazzoni; Andrea Cestari; Renzo Colombo; Massimo Lazzeri; Francesco Montorsi; Luciano Nava; Andrea Losa; Patrizio Rigatti
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 9.  Current status of prostate-sparing cystectomy.

Authors:  John C Kefer; Steven C Campbell
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2008 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.498

10.  Prostate-sparing cystectomy: long-term oncological results.

Authors:  Remco R de Vries; Jakko A Nieuwenhuijzen; Harm van Tinteren; Jorg R Oddens; Otto Visser; Henk G van der Poel; Axel Bex; Willem Meinhardt; Simon Horenblas
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2009-06-22       Impact factor: 5.588

View more
  7 in total

1.  Optimizing outcome reporting after radical cystectomy for organ-confined urothelial carcinoma of the bladder using oncological trifecta and pentafecta.

Authors:  Atiqullah Aziz; Michael Gierth; Michael Rink; Marianne Schmid; Felix K Chun; Roland Dahlem; Florian Roghmann; Rein-Jüri Palisaar; Joachim Noldus; Jörg Ellinger; Stefan C Müller; Armin Pycha; Thomas Martini; Christian Bolenz; Rudolf Moritz; Edwin Herrmann; Bastian Keck; Bernd Wullich; Roman Mayr; Hans-Martin Fritsche; Maximilian Burger; Patrick J Bastian; Christian Seitz; Sabine Brookman-May; Evanguelos Xylinas; Shahrokh F Shariat; Margit Fisch; Matthias May
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-05-07       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 2.  [Radical cystectomy and urinary diversion-what is important ?]

Authors:  J Noldus; G Niegisch; A Pycha; A Karl
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 3.  Systematic review of robotic radical cystectomy functional and quality of life outcomes.

Authors:  Joshua S Jue; David Mikhail; Michael A Feuerstein
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2022-02       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 4.  Current status of laparoscopic and robot-assisted nerve-sparing radical cystectomy in male patients.

Authors:  Jian Huang; Xinxiang Fan; Wen Dong
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2016-05-27

5.  Impact of the Level of Urothelial Carcinoma Involvement of the Prostate on Survival after Radical Cystectomy.

Authors:  Marco Moschini; Francesco Soria; Martin Susani; Stephan Korn; Alberto Briganti; Morgan Roupret; Christian Seitz; Killian Gust; Andrea Haitel; Francesco Montorsi; Gregory Wirth; Brian D Robinson; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Mehmet Özsoy; Michael Rink; Shahrokh F Shariat
Journal:  Bladder Cancer       Date:  2017-07-27

6.  Perioperative and Pathological Outcome of Nerve-Sparing Radical Cystectomy With Ileal Neobladder.

Authors:  Katharina Vogt; Christopher Netsch; Benedikt Becker; Sebastian Oye; Andreas J Gross; Clemens M Rosenbaum
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2021-03-31

7.  Modified completely intrafascial radical cysprostatectomy for bladder cancer: a single-center, blinded, controlled study.

Authors:  Xiao Wang; Jia Guo; Lei Wang; Min Wang; Xiaodong Weng; Hui Chen; Xiuheng Liu
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2021-08-03       Impact factor: 4.430

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.