1
|
Mirto BF, Barone B, Balsamo R, Abate M, Caputo VF, Sciarra A, Calogero A, Romano L, Napolitano L, Sciorio C, Lucarelli G, Lasorsa F, Ferro M, Busetto GM, Del Giudice F, Manfredi C, Tătaru S, Pradere B, Imbimbo C, Crocetto F. Early and late post-procedural complications in different orthotopic neobladder surgical approaches: A systematic review. Surg Oncol 2024; 55:102090. [PMID: 38917777 DOI: 10.1016/j.suronc.2024.102090] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/24/2024] [Revised: 05/05/2024] [Accepted: 05/27/2024] [Indexed: 06/27/2024]
Abstract
Bladder cancer (BCa) represents the second most common malignancy of the genitourinary tract. The major risk factors include age, gender, smoking attitude, and occupational exposure, while the exact etiopathogenesis is still uncertain. Patients diagnosed with a BCa showing invasion of the muscle layer below the submucosa must undergo radical cystectomy (RC) with urinary diversion (UD). Many different surgical approaches to UD have been developed. Packaging an orthotopic neobladder (ON) with a bowel tract represents the gold standard when certain patient selection criteria are satisfied. Using PRISMA guidelines, we performed a systematic review assessing early (within 90 days) and late (beyond 90 days) post-procedural complications of different ON surgical approaches. A comprehensive systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases to identify papers starting from 2012 using dedicated keywords ("neobladder", "orthotopic neobladder", "complications'' and "outcomes"). A total of 27 articles were found to satisfy the inclusion criteria and selected. Although the ON is a safe procedure that guarantees the patient the best quality of life (QoL), it is not free from risks. Many complications could occur during and after the surgical time which imposes the necessity of strict follow-up and careful checks over time, which should be properly discussed with patients before.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benito Fabio Mirto
- Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Biagio Barone
- Department of Surgical Sciences, Urology Unit, AORN Sant'Anna e San Sebastiano, Caserta, Via Ferdinando Palasciano, 81100, Caserta, Italy.
| | | | - Marco Abate
- Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Vincenzo Francesco Caputo
- Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Antonella Sciarra
- Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Naples, NA, Italy
| | - Armando Calogero
- Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, 80131, Italy
| | - Lorenzo Romano
- Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Luigi Napolitano
- Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Carmine Sciorio
- Urology Unit, Alessandro Manzoni Hospital, ASST, Lecco, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Lucarelli
- Department of Emergency & Organ Transplantation - Urology, Andrology & Kidney Transplantation Unit, University of Bari, Bari, Italy
| | - Francesco Lasorsa
- Department of Emergency & Organ Transplantation - Urology, Andrology & Kidney Transplantation Unit, University of Bari, Bari, Italy
| | - Matteo Ferro
- Division of Urology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO)-IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Gian Maria Busetto
- Department of Urology and Organ Transplantation, University of Foggia, 71122, Foggia, Italy
| | - Francesco Del Giudice
- Department of Maternal Infant and Urologic Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, "Sapienza" University of Rome, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Celeste Manfredi
- Urology Unit, Department of Woman, Child and of General and Specialist Surgery, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", 80121, Naples, Italy
| | - Sabin Tătaru
- Department of Simulation Applied in Medicine, George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science and Technology of Targu Mures, Romania
| | - Benjamin Pradere
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, 1030, Austria; Department of Urology, La Croix du Sud Hospital, 31130, Quint-Fonsegrives, France
| | - Ciro Imbimbo
- Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Felice Crocetto
- Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Zennami K, Sumitomo M, Nukaya T, Takenaka M, Ichino M, Takahara K, Sasaki H, Kusaka M, Shiroki R. Impact of Urethra-Preserving Surgery During Radical Cystectomy: An Optimal Urethral Management in the Robotic Era. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2024; 22:102146. [PMID: 39043553 DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102146] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/29/2024] [Revised: 05/07/2024] [Accepted: 06/23/2024] [Indexed: 07/25/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The optimal indication and survival benefits of prophylactic urethrectomy (PU) during radical cystectomy remain unclear. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the impact of urethra-preserving surgery (UPS) on oncological outcome including its recurrence patterns, and to establish an optimal urethral management strategy with a novel UPS technique in the robotic era. PATIENTS AND METHODS We retrospectively analyzed 281 male patients with bladder cancer who received radical cystectomy (RC) (115 with and 166 without PU) at our institutions between 2010 and 2023. Subsequently, perioperative and oncological outcomes were assessed between propensity score-matched cohorts. RESULTS Urethral recurrence (UR) occurred in 5 patients (5/166, 3.0%), all of whom underwent open-RC. Three among those (1.8%) with concomitant metastasis were died of cancer. There were no statistically significant differences between the PU and UPS groups in urethral-recurrence free survival (urethral-RFS) (P = .14), local-RFS (P = .59) and overall survival (OS) (P = .84) in the entire cohort. However, the UPS group showed significantly worse urethral-RFS (P = .008), local-RFS (P = .005) and OS (P = .03) in patients with high-risk of UR. Analysis of recurrence patterns revealed that UPS in high-risk patients significantly increased local recurrence (25.8% vs. 5.0%, P = .02). Conversely, a novel robotic-UPS technique demonstrated significantly favorable perioperative outcomes, comparable local-RFS (P = .79) and OS (P = .16) without UR (0/134, 0%) when compared to robotic-PU. Robotic-UPS also exhibited significantly better local-RFS (P =.007) and OS (P < .001) than open-UPS. CONCLUSIONS UR-related death was rare and PU did not show a survival benefit for the entire cohort. However, inappropriate UPS in patients at high-risk of UR may increase local recurrence which might be responsible for poor survival after UPS rather than disease progression derived from UR. The robotic-UPS has the potential to reduce unnecessary PU, urethral and local recurrence without compromising survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kenji Zennami
- Department of Urology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan.
| | - Makoto Sumitomo
- Department of Urology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan
| | - Takuhisa Nukaya
- Department of Urology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan
| | - Masashi Takenaka
- Department of Urology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan
| | - Manabu Ichino
- Department of Urology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan
| | - Kiyoshi Takahara
- Department of Urology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan
| | - Hitomi Sasaki
- Department of Urology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan
| | - Mamoru Kusaka
- Department of Urology, Fujita Health University Okazaki Medical Center, Okazaki, Japan
| | - Ryoichi Shiroki
- Department of Urology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Laukhtina E, Moschini M, Soria F, Andrea DD, Teoh JYC, Mori K, Albisinni S, Mari A, Krajewski W, Cimadamore A, Abufaraj M, Enikeev D, Neuzillet Y, Giannarini G, Xylinas E, Kamat AM, Roupret M, Babjuk M, Witjes JA, Shariat SF, Pradere B. Follow-up of the Urethra and Management of Urethral Recurrence After Radical Cystectomy: A Systematic Review and Proposal of Management Algorithm by the European Association of Urology-Young Academic Urologists: Urothelial Carcinoma Working Group. Eur Urol Focus 2022; 8:1635-1642. [PMID: 35337773 DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2022.03.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/26/2021] [Revised: 02/20/2022] [Accepted: 03/07/2022] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
CONTEXT Surveillance of the urethra and management of urethral recurrence (UR) after radical cystectomy (RC) is an area with poor evidence. OBJECTIVE We aimed to summarize the available evidence and provide clinicians with practical recommendations on how to prevent and manage UR after RC for bladder cancer. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched during September 2021 for studies evaluating UR after RC. The primary endpoint was oncologic outcomes for patients who experienced UR depending on different surveillance and management approaches. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Forty-three studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. According to the currently available literature, a tight-knitted surveillance protocol should be implemented for males treated with RC and nonorthotopic neobladder diversion as well as patients with prostatic involvement, tumor multifocality, bladder neck involvement, and concomitant carcinoma in situ. A survival benefit of a prophylactic urethrectomy has been reported only in patients at very high risk for UR based on clinical factors. Surveillance protocols were highly heterogeneous and poorly documented among included studies. Patients whose UR was diagnosed based on clinical symptoms had a poor prognosis. Only limited data were available on the comparative effectiveness of watchful waiting after RC versus clinical symptom screening as part of a follow-up strategy. However, the use of regular cytology and/or urethroscopy seems useful in select patients at high risk for UR. Despite limited data on the optimal management of UR, urethra-sparing approaches (transurethral resection of UR) seem to be an option for Ta (only) recurrences; a salvage urethrectomy with or without chemotherapy should be the standard for all others. CONCLUSIONS Based on the currently available literature, we have proposed an algorithm to guide the decision-making process to help identify and treat UR after RC. Given the lack of evidence on how to deal with UR and surveil patients at risk for UR, this study may invigorate research in this area of unmet need. PATIENT SUMMARY Early diagnosis and tailored management of urethral recurrence could help improve oncologic outcomes in these patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ekaterina Laukhtina
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Marco Moschini
- Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, Urological Research Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Soria
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, University of Studies of Torino, Torino, Italy
| | - David D Andrea
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh
- S.H. Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
| | - Keiichiro Mori
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Simone Albisinni
- Service d'Urologie, Hôpital Erasme, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
| | - Andrea Mari
- Department of Urology, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Wojciech Krajewski
- Department of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, University Center of Excellence in Urology, Wrocław Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland
| | - Alessia Cimadamore
- Section of Pathological Anatomy, Marche Polytechnic University, School of Medicine, United Hospitals, Ancona, Italy
| | - Mohammad Abufaraj
- Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - Dmitry Enikeev
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Yann Neuzillet
- Department of Urology, Hôpital Foch, UVSQ-Paris-Saclay University, Suresnes, France
| | - Gianluca Giannarini
- Urology Unit, University Hospital Santa Maria della Misericordia, Udine, Italy
| | - Evanguelos Xylinas
- Department of Urology, Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris University, Paris, France
| | - Ashish M Kamat
- Department of Urology, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, University of Texas, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Morgan Roupret
- GRC n°5, Predictive Onco-Urology, Ap-Hp, Urology, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France
| | - Marko Babjuk
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Hospital Motol, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - J Alfred Witjes
- Department of Urology, Radboud University, Nijmegen Heyendaal, The Netherlands
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia; Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan; Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Benjamin Pradere
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Sanyal SR, Kodituwakku K, Nagra D, Gupta M, Nisreen A, Mohamed K. Spectrum of imaging manifestations of tumour recurrences in orthotopic neobladder. Br J Radiol 2021; 94:20210660. [PMID: 34613795 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20210660] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Continent diversion with orthotopic neobladder is the most upcoming form of urinary diversion postradical cystectomy. This allows patients to void through the native urethra preserving the maximal quality of life. These patients with greater life expectancies increasingly present with a wide range of late complications, which also include local recurrences involving neobladder. Such presentations on surveillance scans can be challenging for radiologists unfamiliar with expected post-surgical anatomy and usual sites of local recurrences. Tumour in neobladder, although rare, has predilection concerning specific sites of involvement and few distinct histological types. Major subtypes of such recurrences with corresponding radiological features on multimodality imaging have been discussed in this article. Management of such cases with revision of diversions is challenging, and surgeons expect a meticulous read of such scans before contemplating pelvic clearance and secondary diversions. This pictorial review aims to appraise the literature related to various primary and secondary types of tumours involving reservoir and anastomotic sites in an orthotopic neobladder, their relative incidences and illustrate salient imaging points with case examples.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - David Nagra
- The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Manish Gupta
- Department of Radiology, Royal Preston Hospital, Preston, UK
| | - Amin Nisreen
- Department of Radiology, Royal Preston Hospital, Preston, UK
| | - Khattab Mohamed
- Department of Radiology, Royal Preston Hospital, Preston, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Laukhtina E, Mori K, D Andrea D, Moschini M, Abufaraj M, Soria F, Mari A, Krajewski W, Albisinni S, Teoh JYC, Quhal F, Sari Motlagh R, Mostafaei H, Katayama S, Grossmann NС, Rajwa P, Enikeev D, Zimmermann K, Fajkovic H, Glybochko P, Shariat SF, Pradere B. Incidence, risk factors and outcomes of urethral recurrence after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Urol Oncol 2021; 39:806-815. [PMID: 34266740 DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2021.06.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2021] [Revised: 05/17/2021] [Accepted: 06/13/2021] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the incidence and risk factors of urethral recurrence (UR) as well as summarizing data on survival outcomes in patients with UR after radical cystectomy (RC) for bladder cancer. The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched in February 2021 for studies of patients with UR after RC. Incidence and risk factors of UR were the primary endpoints. The secondary endpoint was survival outcomes in patients who experienced UR. Twenty-one studies, comprising 9,435 patients, were included in the quantitative synthesis. Orthotopic neobladder (ONB) diversion was associated with a decreased probability of UR compared to non-ONB (pooled OR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.31-0.61, P < 0.001) and male patients had a significantly higher risk of UR compared to female patients (pooled OR: 3.16, 95% CI: 1.83-5.47, P < 0.001). Among risk factors, prostatic urethral or prostatic stromal involvement (pooled HR: 5.44, 95% CI: 3.58-8.26, P < 0.001; pooled HR: 5.90, 95% CI: 1.82-19.17, P = 0.003, respectively) and tumor multifocality (pooled HR: 2.97, 95% CI: 2.05-4.29, P < 0.001) were associated with worse urethral recurrence-free survival. Neither tumor stage (P = 0.63) nor CIS (P = 0.72) were associated with worse urethral recurrence-free survival. Patients with UR had a 5-year CSS that varied from 47% to 63% and an OS - from 40% to 74%; UR did not appear to be related to worse survival outcomes. Male patients treated with non-ONB diversion as well as patients with prostatic involvement and tumor multifocality seem to be at the highest risk of UR after RC. Risk-adjusted standardized surveillance protocols should be developed into clinical practice after RC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ekaterina Laukhtina
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Keiichiro Mori
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - David D Andrea
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Marco Moschini
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, Switzerland; Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, Urological Research Institute, Milano, Italy
| | - Mohammad Abufaraj
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
| | - Francesco Soria
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, University of Studies of Torino, Turin, Italy
| | - Andrea Mari
- Department of Urology, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Wojciech Krajewski
- Department of Urology and Oncologic Urology, Wrocław Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland
| | - Simone Albisinni
- Service d'Urologie, Hôpital Erasme, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
| | - Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh
- S.H. Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
| | - Fahad Quhal
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, King Fahad Specialist Hospital, Dammam, Saudi Arabia
| | - Reza Sari Motlagh
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Men's Health and Reproductive Health Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Hadi Mostafaei
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Research Center for Evidence Based Medicine, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
| | - Satoshi Katayama
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
| | - Nico С Grossmann
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Pawel Rajwa
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Medical University of Silesia, Zabrze, Poland
| | - Dmitry Enikeev
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Kristin Zimmermann
- Department of Urology, Federal Armed Services Hospital Koblenz, Koblenz, Germany
| | - Harun Fajkovic
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Federal Armed Services Hospital Koblenz, Koblenz, Germany
| | - Petr Glybochko
- Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Shahrokh F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia; Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, Jordan University Hospital, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan; Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, NY; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX; Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
| | - Benjamin Pradere
- Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW The clinical significance of ureteral and urethral recurrence in patients treated with radical cystectomy for bladder cancer is scarce and heterogeneous. The aim of the current review is to summarize the recent literature on incidence, diagnosis and oncologic outcomes of ureteral and urethral recurrences after radical cystectomy. RECENT FINDINGS Frozen section analysis (FSA) of ureteral margin had a sensitivity and specificity of 69-77 and 83-96%, respectively. Considering the ureteral margin, the reported sensitivity and specificity were 33-93 and 99-100%, respectively. Transurethral biopsy of the prostatic urethra might help in counseling patients' treatment, although its accuracy and prognostic role is highly questionable. In patients treated with radical cystectomy, recurrence of the urethra or ureteral are rare, occurring approximately in 5% of patients. During the follow-up, urinary cytology and cross-sectional imaging improve the early detection of recurrence in asymptomatic patients, although the majority are diagnosed for symptomatic presentation. Their use should be tailored to the patient's risk of ureteral and/or urethral recurrence. Urethrectomy is indicated in case of singular urethral recurrence, whereas no clear data exists regarding the best management of ureteral recurrence, except surgical removal. SUMMARY Intraoperative FSA of ureters and urethra share good specificity but poor sensitivity. Recurrence at urethra and upper tract are rare and discordant data exists regarding survival outcomes. Oncologic surveillance after radical cystectomy with the aim to detect these recurrences should be tailored to the individualized patient's risk.
Collapse
|