Considerations for Urinary Re-diversion


Oncologic

 Upper tract recurrence/involvement

  Transitional cell carcinoma of the ureter

  Local recurrence infiltrating the ureter

  Recurrence at ureteral implantation site

 Urethral recurrence/second tumor

  Neobladder, male

  Neobladder, female, Morbus Paget urethra

  Neobladder female, obstructive local recurrence

 Recurrence invading diversion/tumor in diversion/invasion

  Neobladder

  Colon conduit, adenocarcinoma of the colon

  Augmentation with neobladder, transitional cell carcinoma of the trigone

  Neobladder, vaginal carcinoma

Emergency

 Pelvic abscess

 Ischemia of the mesenteric artery

 Radiogenic damage

 Necrosis of conduit

 Necrosis of neobladder

Malfunction of initial diversion

 Persisting symptoms from IC after supratrigonal RC

 Persistent pain

 Ureteroenteric stricture

 Conduit stenosis

 Conduit stricture/neurogenic tract/failed bladder reconstruction

 Anatomical functional bladder loss

Renal failure

 Obstruction

Dislike of initial diversion

 RC for benign disease

 RC for malignant disease + no evidence of disease

 For more than 12 months



The indication for RC was oncologic in 28 patients and nononcologic in 23. Conversions were continent to continent (14), incontinent to continent (14), continent to incontinent (13), and incontinent to incontinent (10). Twelve patients had tumor recurrence impacting the initial diversion. In eight patients the indication was abscess or necrosis of the diversion or radiation damage. Six patients with renal failure required conversion. All patients with conversion from incontinent to continent had a strong desire to avoid a stoma. Four patients died perioperatively, and short bowel syndrome developed in one patient. In summary the contemporary indications reflect real-world situations as they will be seen at any major bladder cancer center. Patient dislike of the stoma plays only a minor role.

The potentially greatest diversion-related complication is one that requires a second diversion [5]. Even in the most experienced hands, at least five scenarios may require an alternative diversion, including (1) emergency UD for complications requiring immediate take down of the initial UD, (2) tumor recurrence impacting the urinary tract or the UD, (3) progressive impairment of renal function (in patients with a continent UD), (4) malfunction/complications of the initial UD, and (5) patient dislike of a stoma.



The Dilemma of the Intestine-Ureteral Anastomosis


The major motivation in patients with a conversion from incontinent to continent diversion was dislike of the initial UD. Overall nine male and three female patients in the Hautmann series [5] underwent conversion to an OBS. In seven patients the underlying disease was non-oncologic, and the other five had UC but had no evidence of disease for 1 year. In three of the male patients, the apex/prostate had been left behind at RC. Of the three female patients, two underwent cystectomy at the second UD. In the other six male and female patients, the urethra and the striated sphincter were spared during cystectomy, but the urethral remnant had been closed.

All patients were informed about the risk of postoperative hypercontinence (requiring clean intermittent catheterization) or incontinence. In patients with remnants of the prostate, resection of the residual prostatic tissue was performed without any problems. In a case of an ileal conduit, we left the ureterointestinal anastomoses intact and incorporated this intestinal segment in the neobladder as an afferent tubular segment and part of the lateral wall [5] (See Fig. 12.1)

A370473_1_En_12_Fig1_HTML.gif


Fig. 12.1
Principle of bowel preservation: (a) Ileal conduit is opened along the antimesenteric wall. Proximal portion of the conduit and ileo-ureterostomies are left undisturbed. Arrows indicate attachment sites. (b) Completion of conversion of ileal conduit to ileal neobladder. Afferent limbs and left side wall of the neobladder are spared, i.e., 25 cm of ileum length

In the long term, all female patients experienced hypercontinence [5]. All men with initial complete resection of the prostate and closure of the urethral remnant experienced subneovesical obstruction and underwent transurethral resection of the neovesicourethral anastomosis, or performed clean intermittent catheterization. Male patients who had at least remnants of the prostate had excellent functional long-term results [2]. The results from the series described by Hautmann et al. [5] are consistent with the USC experience [2].

The precision of the anastomosis to the urethra and the presence of a retained apex of the prostate were major factors in the technical success of the operation, degree of continence, and satisfaction of the patients. All four patients who had some portion of retained prostate enjoy excellent continence without anastomotic stricture. In two of the early undiversion patients with direct membranous urethral anastomoses, strictures occurred, and they subsequently chose to proceed with continent cutaneous diversion. The other five patients with anastomoses to the membranous urethral stump did well, but two required an artificial urinary sphincter for continence. These latter five patients had more extensive pelvic mobilization of the urethra for more precise anastomoses. The satisfaction level of all nine continuing neobladder patients, even if an artificial urinary sphincter was necessary, has been exceptional [2].

An occasional bladder cancer patient will have undergone cystoprostatectomy with an inadvertent portion of the prostatic urethra left intact. Many patients with a history of a neurogenic bladder or congenital urinary tract anomalies have undergone cutaneous diversion with only simple cystectomy. These men are ideal candidates for undiversion because the remaining apex of the prostate allows the urethral anastomosis to be performed well above the urogenital diaphragm, and in all four of our cases, a satisfactory anastomosis was accomplished, and good continence has been achieved. These patients must be aware, however, that they are still at risk for prostate cancer in the remaining prostate apex and must continue to be followed with prostate-specific antigen levels and examination.

Only gold members can continue reading. Log In or Register to continue

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Oct 20, 2017 | Posted by in UROLOGY | Comments Off on Considerations for Urinary Re-diversion

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access