Duo Zheng1, Junyao Liu1, Gongjin Wu1, Shujun Yang1, Chuang Luo1, Tianci Du1, Yao Luo1, Junsheng Bao1, Junqiang Tian1, Zhiping Wang1, Panfeng Shang2, Zhongjin Yue3. 1. Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, Key Laboratory of Urological Diseases of Gansu Province, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, No.82 Cui Ying Gate, Cheng guan District, Lanzhou, 730030, Gansu, China. 2. Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, Key Laboratory of Urological Diseases of Gansu Province, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, No.82 Cui Ying Gate, Cheng guan District, Lanzhou, 730030, Gansu, China. shangpf@lzu.edu.cn. 3. Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, Key Laboratory of Urological Diseases of Gansu Province, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, No.82 Cui Ying Gate, Cheng guan District, Lanzhou, 730030, Gansu, China. yuezhongjin@sina.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare perioperative and oncologic outcomes of open modified ureterosigmoidostomy urinary diversion (OMUUD) and intracorporeal modified ureterosigmoidostomy urinary diversion (IMUUD) following laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our single institutional collected database patients undergoing LRC from October 2011 to October 2019. The perioperative characteristics were compared between OMUUD and IMUUD, and overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Overall, 84 patients were included. OMUUD and IMUUD were performed in 63 (75%) and 21 (25%) patients, respectively. IMUUD patients demonstrated shorter postoperative length of stay (16.24 ± 3.91 days vs. 18.98 ± 7.41 days, P = 0.033), similar operation time (498.57 ± 121.44 vs. 462.24 ± 99.71, P = 0.175), similar estimated blood loss [400 (200-475) ml vs. 400 (200-700) ml, P = 0.095], and similar overall complication rate within 30 days (19.05% vs. 25.40%, P = 0.848) and 90 days (23.81% vs. 17.46%, P = 0.748). Complete urinary control rate was 87.3% (55/63) in the OMUUD group. In IMUUD, the complete urinary control rate was 90.5% (19/21). There was no significant difference in OS (χ2 = 0.015, P = 0.901) and PFS (χ2 = 0.107, P = 0.743) between the two groups. CONCLUSION: IMUUD postoperative recovery is faster; other perioperative outcomes and oncology results are not significantly different with OMUUD. It is indicated that IMUUD can be utilized safely and effectively in the urinary diversion after LRC.
OBJECTIVE: To compare perioperative and oncologic outcomes of open modified ureterosigmoidostomy urinary diversion (OMUUD) and intracorporeal modified ureterosigmoidostomy urinary diversion (IMUUD) following laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our single institutional collected database patients undergoing LRC from October 2011 to October 2019. The perioperative characteristics were compared between OMUUD and IMUUD, and overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Overall, 84 patients were included. OMUUD and IMUUD were performed in 63 (75%) and 21 (25%) patients, respectively. IMUUDpatients demonstrated shorter postoperative length of stay (16.24 ± 3.91 days vs. 18.98 ± 7.41 days, P = 0.033), similar operation time (498.57 ± 121.44 vs. 462.24 ± 99.71, P = 0.175), similar estimated blood loss [400 (200-475) ml vs. 400 (200-700) ml, P = 0.095], and similar overall complication rate within 30 days (19.05% vs. 25.40%, P = 0.848) and 90 days (23.81% vs. 17.46%, P = 0.748). Complete urinary control rate was 87.3% (55/63) in the OMUUD group. In IMUUD, the complete urinary control rate was 90.5% (19/21). There was no significant difference in OS (χ2 = 0.015, P = 0.901) and PFS (χ2 = 0.107, P = 0.743) between the two groups. CONCLUSION:IMUUD postoperative recovery is faster; other perioperative outcomes and oncology results are not significantly different with OMUUD. It is indicated that IMUUD can be utilized safely and effectively in the urinary diversion after LRC.
Entities:
Keywords:
Laparoscopy; Mainz pouch II; Radical cystectomy; Ureterosigmoidostomy; Urinary diversion; Urothelial carcinoma of the bladder
Authors: Pierre A Clavien; Jeffrey Barkun; Michelle L de Oliveira; Jean Nicolas Vauthey; Daniel Dindo; Richard D Schulick; Eduardo de Santibañes; Juan Pekolj; Ksenija Slankamenac; Claudio Bassi; Rolf Graf; René Vonlanthen; Robert Padbury; John L Cameron; Masatoshi Makuuchi Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Giovanni Palleschi; Antonio Luigi Pastore; Andrea Ripoli; Luigi Silvestri; Vincenzo Petrozza; Antonio Carbone Journal: Urology Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Stavros I Tyritzis; Abolfazl Hosseini; Justin Collins; Tommy Nyberg; Martin N Jonsson; Oscar Laurin; Dinyar Khazaeli; Christofer Adding; Martin Schumacher; N Peter Wiklund Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-06-06 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: J Alfred Witjes; Thierry Lebret; Eva M Compérat; Nigel C Cowan; Maria De Santis; Harman Maxim Bruins; Virginia Hernández; Estefania Linares Espinós; James Dunn; Mathieu Rouanne; Yann Neuzillet; Erik Veskimäe; Antoine G van der Heijden; Georgios Gakis; Maria J Ribal Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2016-06-30 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Mazyar Ghanaat; Andrew G Winer; Daniel D Sjoberg; Bing Ying Poon; Mahyar Kashan; Amy L Tin; John P Sfakianos; Eugene K Cha; Timothy F Donahue; Guido Dalbagni; Harry W Herr; Bernard H Bochner; Andrew J Vickers; S Machele Donat Journal: Urology Date: 2018-09-20 Impact factor: 2.649