Related Experiment Videos
[From urostoma to bladder replacement: current possibilities in urinary diversion]
S Horenblas1, W Meinhardt, M B van Eekeren
1Het Nederlands Kanker Instituut/Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Ziekenhuis, Amsterdam.
Nederlands Tijdschrift Voor Geneeskunde
|September 9, 1995
Summary
This study analyzed 48 urinary diversions in cancer patients, finding that newer continent reservoir and neo-bladder techniques are viable alternatives to traditional Bricker diversions. Patients should be informed about these advanced urinary diversion options.
Area of Science:
- Urology
- Oncology
- Surgical Innovation
Context:
- Retrospective analysis of 48 urinary diversions at a Dutch cancer institute (1989-1993).
- Focus on oncological patient population undergoing cystectomy or pelvic exenteration.
- Evaluation of indications, techniques, and postoperative complications.
Purpose:
- To analyze the outcomes of various urinary diversion techniques in cancer patients.
- To compare the standard Bricker diversion with newer continent reservoirs and neo-bladders.
- To identify specific challenges and contraindications associated with advanced urinary diversion methods.
Summary:
- 48 patients (24 male, 24 female, mean age 62.1) underwent urinary diversion for bladder cancer, pelvic exenteration, incontinence, or urethral cancer.
- Techniques included 21 Bricker diversions, 25 continent reservoirs/neo-bladders, 1 ureterosigmoidostomy, and 1 Mitrofanoff procedure.
- Bricker diversion favored for extensive surgery, older age, or fear of incontinence; new techniques had issues with catheterization and folate deficiency.
Impact:
- Continent reservoirs and neo-bladders are effective urinary diversion options with few contraindications.
- Contraindications include limited intestine, tumor invasion, and patient inability to self-catheterize.
- Informing patients about novel urinary diversion techniques is crucial for informed decision-making.