Advertisement

Der Urologe

, Volume 58, Issue 1, pp 22–24 | Cite as

Organerhalt bei Tumoren des oberen Harntraktes

  • F. vom DorpEmail author
Leitthema
  • 49 Downloads

Zusammenfassung

Das Urothelkarzinom des oberen Harntraktes (OHT) ist eine seltene Tumorentität und macht etwa 5 % der Urotheltumoren aus. Die Tumorbiologie entspricht im Wesentlichen der der Urothelkarzinome der Harnblase. Die lokale Tumorkontrolle ist im OHT sehr viel schwieriger zu erreichen als bei der transurethralen Blasentumorresektion. Deshalb wird nicht selten eine Nephroureterektomie durchgeführt bei einem Tumor, der nur eine geringe Progressionsneigung aufweist. Der vorliegende Artikel nimmt die zur Verfügung stehende Literatur zur Grundlage, um die organerhaltenden Therapiestrategien bei Tumoren des OHT zu evaluieren. In Zusammenfassung der zur Verfügung stehenden Daten deutet sich an, dass bei kompletter Resektabilität der Organerhalt gleichwertig ist zur radikalen Nephroureterektomie unabhängig von der T‑ und G‑Kategorie des Tumors.

Schlüsselwörter

Urothelkarzinom Nephroureterektomie Resektabilität Lynch-Syndrom Carcinoma in situ 

Organ preservation in cancer of the upper urinary tract

Abstract

Urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract is a rare disease. Tumor biology is comparable to transitional cell carcinomas of the bladder. Local tumor control is much more difficult to achieve in the upper urinary tract than in the bladder. Radical nephroureterectomy is often performed due to carcinomas with low grade histology. Progression rates in these cases are rare; overtreatment has to be discussed. The current article uses the available published data to discuss whether local treatment is an option for tumors of the upper urinary tract. Summarizing the available data, it is indicated that if complete resectability is possible organ preservation is equivalent to radical nephroureterectomy independent of the T‑ and G‑category of the tumor.

Keywords

Urothelial carcinoma Nephroureterectomy Overtreatment Lynch syndrome Carcinoma in situ 

Notes

Einhaltung ethischer Richtlinien

Interessenkonflikt

F. vom Dorp gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Dieser Beitrag beinhaltet keine von dem Autor durchgeführten Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.

Literatur

  1. 1.
    Huang WC, Elkin EB, Levey AS, Jang TL, Russo P (2009) Partial nephrectomy versus radical nephrectomy in patients with small renal tumors—is there a difference in mortality and cardiovascular outcomes? J Urol 181(1):55–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sijmons RH, Kiemeney LA, Witjes JA, Vasen HF (1998) Urinary tract cancer and hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer: risks and screening options. J Urol 160(2):466–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chlapoutakis K, Theocharopoulos N, Yarmenitis S, Damilakis J (2010) Performance of computed tomographic urography in diagnosis of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma, in patients presenting with hematuria: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol 73(2):334–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rouprêt M, Babjuk M, Compérat E, Zigeuner R, Sylvester RJ, Burger M, Cowan NC, Böhle A, Van Rhijn BW, Kaasinen E, Palou J, Shariat SF (2015) European Association of Urology Guidelines on upper urinary tract urothelial cell carcinoma: 2015 update. Eur Urol 68(5):868–879CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yafi FA, Novara G, Shariat SF, Gupta A, Matsumoto K, Walton TJ, Fritsche HM, El-Hakim A, Trischler S, Martínez-Salamanca JI, Seitz C, Ficarra V, Zattoni F, Karakiewicz PI, Kassouf W (2012) Impact of tumour location versus multifocality in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma treated with nephroureterectomy and bladder cuff excision: a homogeneous series without perioperative chemotherapy. BJU Int 110(2 Pt 2):E7–E13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ouzzane A, Colin P, Xylinas E, Pignot G, Ariane MM, Saint F, Hoarau N, Adam E, Azemar MD, Bensadoun H, Cormier L, Cussenot O, Houlgatte A, Karsenty G, Bruyère F, Maurin C, Nouhaud FX, Phe V, Polguer T, Roumiguié M, Ruffion A, Rouprêt M (2011) French Collaborative National Database on UUT-UC. Ureteral and multifocal tumours have worse prognosis than renal pelvic tumours in urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract treated by nephroureterectomy. Eur Urol 60(6):1258–1265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chromecki TF, Cha EK, Fajkovic H, Margulis V, Novara G, Scherr DS, Lotan Y, Raman JD, Kassouf W, Bensalah K, Weizer A, Kikuchi E, Roscigno M, Remzi M, Matsumoto K, Walton TJ, Pycha A, Ficarra V, Karakiewicz PI, Zigeuner R, Pummer K, Shariat SF (2012) The impact of tumor multifocality on outcomes in patients treated with radical nephroureterectomy. Eur Urol 61(2):245–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lughezzani G, Burger M, Margulis V, Matin SF, Novara G, Roupret M, Shariat SF, Wood CG, Zigeuner R (2012) Prognostic factors in upper urinary tract urothelial carcinomas: a comprehensive review of the current literature. Eur Urol 62(1):100–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Williams AK, Kassouf W, Chin J, Rendon R, Jacobsen N, Fairey A, Kapoor A, Black P, Lacombe L, Tanguay S, So A, Lattouf JB, Bell D, Fradet Y, Saad F, Matsumoto E, Drachenberg D, Cagiannos I, Izawa JI (2013) Multifocality rather than tumor location is a prognostic factor in upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Urol Oncol 31(7):1161–1165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Krambeck AE, Thompson RH, Lohse CM, Patterson DE, Segura JW, Zincke H, Elliott DS, Blute ML (2007) Endoscopic management of upper tract urothelial carcinoma in patients with a history of bladder urothelial carcinoma. J Urol 177(5):1721–1726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cutress ML, Stewart GD, Tudor EC, Egong EA, Wells-Cole S, Phipps S, Thomas BG, Riddick AC, McNeill SA, Tolley DA (2013) Endoscopic versus laparoscopic management of noninvasive upper tract urothelial carcinoma: 20-year single center experience. J Urol 189(6):2054–2060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grasso M, Fishman AI, Cohen J, Alexander B (2012) Ureteroscopic and extirpative treatment of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a 15-year comprehensive review of 160 consecutive patients. BJU Int 110(11):1618–1626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jeldres C, Sun M, Isbarn H, Lughezzani G, Budäus L, Alasker A, Shariat SF, Lattouf JB, Widmer H, Pharand D, Arjane P, Graefen M, Montorsi F, Perrotte P, Karakiewicz PI (2010) A population-based assessment of perioperative mortality after nephroureterectomy for upper-tract urothelial carcinoma. Urology 75(2):315–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Azémar MD, Comperat E, Richard F, Cussenot O, Rouprêt M (2011) Bladder recurrence after surgery for upper urinary tract urothelial cell carcinoma: frequency, risk factors, and surveillance. Urol Oncol 29(2):130–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Raman JD, Ng CK, Boorjian SA, Vaughan ED Jr, Sosa RE, Scherr DS (2005) Bladder cancer after managing upper urinary tract transitional cell carcinoma: predictive factors and pathology. BJU Int 96(7):1031–1035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Terakawa T, Miyake H, Muramaki M, Takenaka A, Hara I, Fujisawa M (2008) Risk factors for intravesical recurrence after surgical management of transitional cell carcinoma of the upper urinary tract. Urology 71(1):123–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ito A, Shintaku I, Satoh M, Ioritani N, Tochigi T, Numata I, Namima T, Kambe K, Kyan A, Ueno S, Katoh S, Adachi H, Yamashita S, Yamaguchi T, Arai Y, Tohoku Urological EBM Study Group. (2013) Intravesical seeding of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma cells during nephroureterectomy: an exploratory analysis from the THPMG trial. Jpn J Clin Oncol 43(11):1139–1144CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Helios Klinikum DuisburgDuisburgDeutschland

Personalised recommendations