Urinary Diversions After Radiation for Prostate Cancer: Indications and Treatment

Pubic bone osteomyelitis and fistulas after radiation therapy of the pelvic region: patient-reported outcomes and urological management of a rare but serious complication

PURPOSE

This study investigated late urinary adverse events (UAEs) in patients who underwent pelvic radiation therapy, with a focus on occurrence, diagnostic characteristics and the impact of subsequent extirpative surgery with the need of urinary diversion on quality of life.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 20 patients after pelvic radiotherapy (2016-2022) was conducted. Data included demographics, perioperative details, oncological parameters, and patient-reported outcomes. Imaging (CT, MRI) was examined for early manifestations of late UAEs.

RESULTS

In the study cohort, prostate cancer was the primary malignancy in 85% with a mean radiation dose of 84 Gray over 35 days. Time to diagnosis of late UAEs was 4.0 years post-radiation. Radiological assessment demonstrated a progressive increase in typical CT and MRI features of pubic bone osteomyelitis over time. Surgical interventions, mainly cystectomy, were required with variable outcomes in patient-reported post-surgery quality of life.

CONCLUSION

Diagnosing and managing late UAEs after pelvic radiation necessitate an understanding of their occurrence, diagnostic features and appropriate management strategies. Early imaging, particularly MRI, is crucial for timely diagnosis and treatment planning. Variable post-surgery quality of life underscores the importance of a multidisciplinary approach in managing late UAEs. The study contributes to understanding these complications and emphasizes their consideration in post-radiation follow-up care.

Management of the Devastated Bladder Outlet after Prostate CANCER Treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Devastating complications of the bladder outlet resulting from prostate cancer treatments are relatively uncommon. However, the combination of the high incidence of prostate cancer and patient longevity after treatment have raised awareness of adverse outcomes deteriorating patients' quality of life. This narrative review discusses the diagnostic work-up and management options for bladder outlet obstruction resulting from prostate cancer treatments, including those that require urinary diversion.

RECENT FINDINGS

The devastated bladder outlet can be a consequence of the treatment of benign conditions, but more frequently from complications of pelvic cancer treatments. Regardless of etiology, the initial treatment ladder involves endoluminal options such as dilation and direct vision internal urethrotomy, with or without intralesional injection of anti-fibrotic agents. If these conservative strategies fail, surgical reconstruction should be considered. Although surgical reconstruction provides the best prospect of durable success, reconstructive procedures are also associated with serious complications. In the worst circumstances, such as prior radiotherapy, failed reconstruction, devastated bladder outlet with end-stage bladders, or patient's severe comorbidities, reconstruction may neither be realistic nor justified. Urinary diversion with or without cystectomy may be the best option for these patients. Thorough patient counseling before treatment selection is of utmost importance. Outcomes and repercussions on quality of life vary extensively with management options. Meticulous preoperative diagnostic evaluation is paramount in selecting the right treatment strategy for each individual patient. The risk of bladder outlet obstruction, and its severest form, devastated bladder outlet, after treatment of prostate cancer is not negligible, especially following radiation. Management includes endoluminal treatment, open or robot-assisted laparoscopic reconstruction, and urinary diversion in the worst circumstances, with varying success rates.

Pelvic radiation-induced urinary strictures: etiology and management of a challenging disease

Radiation is a common treatment modality for pelvic malignancies. While it can be effective at cancer control, downstream effects can manifest months to years after treatment, leaving patients with significant morbidity. Within urology, a particularly difficult post-radiation consequence is urinary tract stricture, either of the urethra, bladder neck, or ureter. In this review, we will discuss the mechanism of radiation damage and treatment options for these potentially devastating urinary sequelae.

Devastated Bladder Outlet in Pelvic Cancer Survivors: Issues on Surgical Reconstruction and Quality of Life

Bladder outlet obstruction following treatment of pelvic cancer, predominantly prostate cancer, occurs in 1-8% of patients. The high incidence of prostate cancer combined with the long-life expectancy after treatment has increased concerns with cancer survivorship care. However, despite increased oncological cure rates, these adverse events do occur, compromising patients' quality of life. Non-traumatic obstruction of the posterior urethra and bladder neck include membranous and prostatic urethral stenosis and bladder neck stenosis (also known as contracture). The devastated bladder outlet can result from benign conditions, such as neurogenic dysfunction, trauma, iatrogenic causes, or more frequently from complications of oncologic treatment, such as prostate, bladder and rectum. Most posterior urethral stenoses may respond to endoluminal treatments such as dilatation, direct vision internal urethrotomy, and occasionally urethral stents. Although surgical reconstruction offers the best chance of durable success, these reconstructive options are fraught with severe complications and, therefore, are far from being ideal. In patients with prior RT, failed reconstruction, densely fibrotic and/or necrotic and calcified posterior urethra, refractory incontinence or severe comorbidities, reconstruction may not be either feasible or recommended. In these cases, urinary diversion with or without cystectomy is usually required. This review aims to discuss the diagnostic evaluation and treatment options for patients with bladder outlet obstruction with a special emphasis on patients unsuitable for reconstruction of the posterior urethra and requiring urinary diversion.

Management of Medium and Long Term Complications Following Prostate Cancer Treatment Resulting in Urinary Diversion - A Narrative Review

The purpose of this narrative review is to discuss and highlight recently published studies regarding the surgical management of patients suffering from prostate cancer treatment complications. Focus will be put on the recalcitrant and more complex cases which might lead to urinary diversion as a definite, last resort treatment. It is in the nature of every treatment, that complications will occur and be bothersome for both patients and physicians. A small percentage of patients following prostate cancer treatment (radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, or other focal therapies) will suffer side effects and thus, will experience a loss of quality of life. These side effects can persist for months and even years. Often, conservative management strategies fail resulting in recalcitrant recurrences. Prostate cancer patients with "end-stage bladder," "devastated outlet," or a history of multiple failed interventions, are fortunately rare, but can be highly challenging for both patients and Urologists. In a state of multiple previous surgical procedures and an immense psychological strain for the patient, urinary diversion can offer a definite, last resort surgical solution for this small group of patients. Ideally, they should be transferred to centers with experience in this field and a careful patient selection is needed. As these cases are highly complex, a multidisciplinary approach is often necessary in order to guarantee an improvement of quality of life.

Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Prostate Cancer Patients Treated With Radiation Therapy: Past and Present

The incidence of prostate cancer (PCa) is increasing concomitantly with population aging. Accordingly, interest in radiation therapy (RT) and the frequency of RT are also increasing. The types of RT can be broadly divided into external beam RT (EBRT), brachytherapy (BT), and combination therapy (EBRT+BT). Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) after RT for the treatment of PCa are common; however, there are few reviews on the relationship between RT and LUTS. Herein, we review the causes and incidence of LUTS, as well as the evaluation and treatment options. Because of the reported risks of RT, patients undergoing RT should be counseled regarding the challenges of treatment and informed that they may have higher failure rates than nonirradiated patients. Moreover, thorough evaluation and treatment strategies are needed to support treatment recommendations. With a review of the existing literature, this narrative article provides an overview to aid urologists in treating patients presenting with complications associated with RT for the treatment of PCa. Further research is required to provide evidence of the effectiveness and feasibility of the management approach to the care of patients with LUTS after RT for the treatment of PCa.

[Devastated bladder outlet-suprapubic catheter vs. reconstruction]

The combination of a severe urethral sphincter defect with simultaneous development of recurrent bladder outlet obstruction characterizes a "devastated bladder outlet", which often is not surgically reconstructable. Clinically, quality of life is considerably compromised in affected patients with a wide variance of symptoms, mostly complete incontinence, but also urinary retention. This condition is usually preceded by multiple endoscopic interventions or even open surgical procedures, occasionally also in combination with radiotherapy of the pelvic region as part of multimodal oncological therapy. Treatment of these cases is complex and limited to few promising procedures. A potential therapy should primarily include the decision about the possibility of preserving the urinary bladder. In individual cases, this can result in simple therapy options while at the same time maintaining an acceptable quality of life for those affected. If there is no possibility of a refunctionalization of the original bladder, supravesical urinary diversion is indicated as a last-resort therapy. This paper provides a review as well as the limits and possibilities of conservative and surgical treatment options for a devastated bladder outlet.

Posterior urethral stenosis after prostate cancer treatment: contemporary options for definitive management

Posterior urethral stenosis (PUS) is an uncommon but challenging problem following prostate cancer therapy. A review of the recent literature on the prevalence of PUS and treatment modalities used in the last decade was performed. A summative narrative of current accepted techniques in management of PUS is presented, and supplement with our own experience and algorithms.

Mid term functional results following surgical treatment of recto-urinary fistulas postprostate cancer treatment

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the mid term functional results of patients treated for RUF and to determine an optimal treatment strategy to improve their quality of life. Recto-urinary Fistula (RUF) is a rare complication following prostate cancer treatment, and can have a major impact on patients' quality of life. There is a lack of consensus concerning the best approach and different techniques have been proposed: endoscopic, transrectal, perineal and transperitoneal (open, laparoscopic or robotic).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the charts of patients who underwent RUF repair from January 2001 to December 2010 at our Institute. 16 patients who developed RUF following prostate cancer treatment were included in the study. The fistula had to be confirmed both clinically and by imaging. All patients had follow up consultation every 3 month for the first year and then annually. They were asked to fill questionnaires evaluating functional outcomes. The International Continence Society (ICS) score was used to assess the postoperative urinary continence. Fecal continence was evaluated with the Wexner score and sexual function was assessed with the International Index for erectile function (IIEF-5) score.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven percent patients (14/16) in our series developed RUF as a consequence of prostate cancer surgery and 13% (2/16) postbrachytherapy (BT). All patients initially had a diversion colostomy and a supra pubic catheter. 69% (11/16) underwent primary YM repair and 73% (8/11) were successful. 2/3 primary failures were successfully retreated with graciloplasty. Primary gracilis flap interposition (GFI), on 3 non-irradiated patients were successful (100%). Primary GFI postbrachytherapy, no patient had recover urinary and digestive continuity. In total primary GIF was successful in 60% (3/5). Over all long term, success rate with a urinary and digestive continuity and without recurrence of the fistula was 81% (13/16). Mid term functional results were evaluated at mean follow up of 40 months (14-92). 13% (2/16) achieved complete urinary continence, 48% (7/16) required single pad, 25% (4/16) developed major incontinence, 7% (1/16) required urinary diversion and 13% (2/16) developed complete urethral closure post BT requiring permanent suprapubic catheterization. Colostomy was reversed in 93% (15/16) cases. 75% (12/16) achieved complete faecal continence, minor incontinence (wexner score 3-4) was seen in 13% (2/16) and major incontinence (wexner score 14) in 7% (1/16) and 7% (1/16) required a long term colostomy. 19% (3/16) developed colostomy related complications. Only 13% (2/16) achieved adequate erections with the use of intra cavernosal prostaglandin injections.

CONCLUSIONS

RUF following prostate cancer treatment is a serious complication with severe repercussion on patients' quality of life. Surgical repair with the York Mason technique or Gracilis Flap interposition is associated with good success rates. If available pediculed gracilis muscle should be used as it offers better success rates.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Radiotherapy-related complications presenting to a urology department: a more common problem than previously thought?

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the burden of the side effects of radiotherapy on a tertiary referral urology department.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective study of all urology admissions to a public urology department at a tertiary hospital in a 6-month period was performed. Patients admitted with complications attributable to radiotherapy were included in the study. Data obtained included patient demographics, radiotherapy details, complication type and management required.

RESULTS

A total of 1198 patients were admitted; 921 (77%) were elective and 277 (23%) were emergency admissions. Thirteen out of the 921 (1.4%) elective admissions and 20 out of the 277 (7.2%) emergency admissions were attributable to radiotherapy complications. Radiotherapy complications was the fourth most common reason for emergency admission, ahead of acute urinary retention. These 33 admissions were accounted for by 21 patients. A total of 39 separate complications attributable to radiotherapy were diagnosed, with some patients having multiple complications. The median (interquartile range) time to onset of complications was 4 (1-9) years. The surgical intervention rate was 67%. The commonest procedures were washout with/without clot evacuation or diathermy in theatre (15.8%) and urethral dilatation/bladder neck incision (15.8%). Two urinary diversions and two cystoprostatectomies plus urinary diversion were performed.

CONCLUSION

Radiotherapy complications are consequential and account for a substantial proportion of a tertiary urology department's emergency workload. These complications generally occur years after radiotherapy and frequently require surgical intervention.

Management of bladder neck stenosis and urethral stricture and stenosis following treatment for prostate cancer

The aim of this review is to examine all urethral strictures and stenoses subsequent to treatment for prostate cancer, including radical prostatectomy (RP), radiotherapy, high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) and cryotherapy. The overall majority respond to endoscopic treatment, including dilatation, direct visual internal urethrotomy (DVIU) or bladder neck incision (BNI). There are adjunct treatments to endoscopic management, including injections of corticosteroids and mitomycin C (MMC) and urethral stents, which remain controversial and are not currently mainstay of treatment. Recalcitrant strictures are most commonly managed with urethroplasty, while recalcitrant stenosis is relatively rare yet almost always associated with bothersome urinary incontinence, requiring bladder neck reconstruction and subsequent artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation, or urinary diversion for the devastated outlet.

Decision analysis model evaluating the cost of a temporary hydrogel rectal spacer before prostate radiation therapy to reduce the incidence of rectal complications

PURPOSE

We conducted a decision analysis to evaluate the cost effectiveness of a newly Food and Drug Administration approved rectal spacer gel (SpaceOAR, Augmenix) for the reduction of rectal toxicity of prostate radiation therapy (RT).

METHODS

A decision tree model (TreeAge Pro) was used to compare the strategy of pretherapy placement of a spacing hydrogel before RT to RT alone. The model compared costs associated with rectal complications because of rectal toxicity over a 10-year period across 3 different RT modalities. Rectal toxicity rates were estimated from studies on conformal RT dose escalation, high-dose stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and low-dose SBRT. Rectal toxicity reduction rates (baseline reduction 70%) were estimated from recently published 15 month data using a rectal spacer. Direct and indirect cost estimates for established grades of rectal toxicity were based on national and institutional costs. Reduction in short-term complications were assumed to carry forward to a reduction in long-term toxicity. One-way and two-way sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The overall standard management cost for conformal RT was $3,428 vs. $3,946 with rectal spacer for an incremental cost of $518 over 10 years. A 1-way sensitivity analyses showed the breakeven cost of spacer at $2,332 or a breakeven overall risk reduction of 86% at a cost of $2,850. For high-dose SBRT, spacer was immediately cost effective with a savings of $2,640 and breakeven risk reduction at 36%. However, 2-way spacer cost to risk reduction sensitivity analyses were performed.

CONCLUSION

The use of a rectal spacer for conformal RT results in a marginal cost increase with a significant reduction in rectal toxicity assuming recently published 15 month rectal toxicity reduction is maintained over 10 years. For high-dose SBRT it was cost effective. Further studies would be necessary to validate the long-term benefits of rectal spacers.