Advertisement

InFo Hämatologie + Onkologie

, Volume 22, Issue 6, pp 12–17 | Cite as

Schwerpunkt Urothelkarzinom

Chirurgische Therapie des Harnblasenkarzinoms

  • Florian Janisch
  • Shahrokh F. Shariat
  • Michael RinkEmail author
Schwerpunkt

Der vorliegende Beitrag liefert einen Überblick über die aktuelle Studienlage zur radikalen Zystektomie (RC) in der Behandlung des fortgeschrittenen Harnblasenkarzinoms. Ziel ist es, die Relevanz der RC für die Therapie dieses komplexen Krankheitsbildes zu verdeutlichen.

Literatur

  1. 1.
    Babjuk M et al. EAU Guidelines on NonMuscleinvasive Urothelial Carcinoma of the Bladder: Update 2016. European Urology. 2017;71(3):447–61PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dalbagni G et al. Clinical outcome in a contemporary series of restaged patients with clinical T1 bladder cancer. Eur Urol. 2009;56(6):903–10PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    van den Bosch S, Alfred Witjes J. Longterm cancerspecific survival in patients with highrisk, nonmuscleinvasive bladder cancer and tumour progression: a systematic review. Eur Urol. 2011;60(3):493–500PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alfred Witjes J et al. Updated 2016 EAU Guidelines on Muscleinvasive and Metastatic Bladder Cancer. Eur Urol. 2017;71(3):462–75PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fritsche HM et al. Corrigendum to “Characteristics and Outcomes of Patients with Clinical T1 Grade 3 Urothelial Carcinoma Treated with Radical Cystectomy: Results from an International Cohort” [Eur Urol 2010;57:300–9]. Eur Urol. 2015;68(1):171PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mari A et al. A systematic review and metaanalysis of the impact of lymphovascular invasion in bladder cancer transurethral resection specimens. BJU Int. 2019;123(1):11–21PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Herr HW, Sogani PC. Does early cystectomy improve the survival of patients with high risk superficial bladder tumors? J Urol. 2001;166(4):1296–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Raj GV et al. Treatment paradigm shift may improve survival of patients with high risk superficial bladder cancer. J Urol. 2007;177(4):1283–6; discussion 6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hautmann RE et al. Urinary diversion. Urology. 2007;69(1 Suppl):17–49PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Oing C et al. Second Line Chemotherapy for Advanced and Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: Vinflunine and BeyondA Comprehensive Review of the Current Literature. J Urol. 2016;195(2):254–63PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Miller DC et al. The impact of comorbid disease on cancer control and survival following radical cystectomy. J Urol. 2003;169(1):105–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shariat SF et al. Bladder cancer in the elderly. Urologic oncology. 2009;27(6):653–67PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee RK et al. Urinary diversion after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: options, patient selection, and outcomes. BJU Int. 2014;113(1):11–23PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mertens LS et al. Prostate sparing cystectomy for bladder cancer: 20year single center experience. J Urol. 2014;191(5):1250–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Moschini M et al. Impact of the level of urothelial carcinoma involvement of the prostate on survival after radical cystectomy. Bladder Cancer. 2017;3(3):161–9PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dobruch J et al. Gender and Bladder Cancer: A Collaborative Review of Etiology, Biology, and Outcomes. Eur Urol. 2016;69(2):300–10PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lucca I et al. Gender differences in incidence and outcomes of urothelial and kidney cancer. Nat Rev Urol. 2015;12(10):585–92PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yuh B et al. Systematic review and cumulative analysis of oncologic and functional outcomes after robotassisted radical cystectomy. Eur Urol. 2015;67(3):402–22PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Novara G et al. Systematic review and cumulative analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical cystectomy. Eur Urol. 2015;67(3):376–401PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wilson TG et al. Best practices in robot-assisted radical cystectomy and urinary reconstruction: recommendations of the Pasadena Consensus Panel. Eur Urol. 2015;67(3):363–75PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tang K et al. Laparoscopic versus open radical cystectomy in bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies. PLoS One. 2014;9(5):e95667PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bochner BH et al. Comparing Open Radical Cystectomy and Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Eur Urol. 2015;67(6):1042–50PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Khan MS et al. A Single-centre Early Phase Randomised Controlled Three-arm Trial of Open, Robotic, and Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy (CORAL). Eur Urol. 2016;69(4):613–21PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Isbarn H, Jeldres C, Zini L, et al. A population based assessment of perioperative mortality after cystectomy for bladder cancer. J Urol. 2009;182(1):70–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tilki D, Brausi M, Colombo R, et al. Lymphadenectomy for bladder cancer at the time of radical cystectomy. Eur Urol. 2013;64(2):266–76PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Poulsen AL et al. Radical cystectomy: extending the limits of pelvic lymph node dissection improves survival for patients with bladder cancer confined to the bladder wall. J Urol. 1998;160(6 Pt 1):2015–9; discussion 20PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gschwend JE et al. Extended Versus Limited Lymph Node Dissection in Bladder Cancer Patients Undergoing Radical Cystectomy: Survival Results from a Prospective, Randomized Trial. Eur Urol. 2019;75(4):604–11PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bruins HM et al. The impact of the extent of lymphadenectomy on oncologic outcomes in patients undergoing radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol. 2014;66(6):1065–77PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shariat SF et al. Pathologic nodal staging score for bladder cancer: a decision tool for adjuvant therapy after radical cystectomy. Eur Urol. 2013;63(2):371–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hernandez V et al. Oncological and functional outcomes of sexual function-preserving cystectomy compared with standard radical cystectomy in men: A systematic review. Urol Oncol. 2017;35(9):539.e17–.e29Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kessler TM et al. Attempted nerve sparing surgery and age have a significant effect on urinary continence and erectile function after radical cystoprostatectomy and ileal orthotopic bladder substitution. J Urol. 2004;172(4 Pt 1):1323–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Veskimae E et al. Systematic review of the oncological and functional outcomes of pelvic organ-preserving radical cystectomy (RC) compared with standard RC in women who undergo curative surgery and orthotopic neobladder substitution for bladder cancer. BJU Int. 2017;120(1):12–24PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hautmann RE et al. Lessons learned from 1,000 neobladders: the 90-day complication rate. J Urol. 2010;184(3):990–4; quiz 1235PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yang LS et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of quality of life outcomes after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. Surg Oncol. 2016;25(3):281–97PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Gershman B et al. Comparative impact of continent and incontinent urinary diversion on long-term renal function after radical cystectomy in patients with preoperative chronic kidney disease 2 and chronic kidney disease 3a. Int J Urol. 2015;22(7):651–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gerharz EW et al. Metabolic and functional consequences of urinary reconstruction with bowel. BJU Int. 2003;91(2):143–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Stenzl A et al. Radical cystectomy with orthotopic neobladder for invasive bladder cancer: a critical analysis of long term oncological, functional and quality of life results. International braz j urol: official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology. 2010;36(5):537–47Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Nieuwenhuijzen JA et al. Urinary diversions after cystectomy: the association of clinical factors, complications and functional results of four different diversions. Eur Urol. 2008;53(4):834–42; discussion 424PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Madersbacher S et al. Longterm outcome of ileal conduit diversion. J Urol. 2003;169(3):985–90PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Longo N et al. Complications and quality of life in elderly patients with several comorbidities undergoing cutaneous ureterostomy with single stoma or ileal conduit after radical cystectomy. BJU Int. 2016;118(4):521–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Berger I et al. Impact of the use of bowel for urinary diversion on perioperative complications and 90-day mortality in patients aged 75 years or older. Urol Int. 2015;94(4):394–400PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Shariat SF et al. The effect of age and gender on bladder cancer: a critical review of the literature. BJU Int. 2010;105(3):300–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Deliveliotis C et al. Urinary diversion in high-risk elderly patients: modified cutaneous ureterostomy or ileal conduit? Urology. 2005;66(2):299–304PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Stein JP, Skinner DG. Radical cystectomy for invasive bladder cancer: longterm results of a standard procedure. World J Urol. 2006;24(3):296–304PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Donat SM et al. Radical cystectomy in octogenarians—does morbidity outweigh the potential survival benefits? J Urol. 2010;183(6):2171–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Lebret T et al. After cystectomy, is it justified to perform a bladder replacement for patients with lymph node positive bladder cancer? Eur Urol. 2002;42(4):344–9; discussion 9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Stein JP et al. Pathological guidelines for orthotopic urinary diversion in women with bladder cancer: a review of the literature. J Urol. 2007;178(3 Pt 1):756–60PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Stein JP et al. Indications and technique of the orthotopic neobladder in women. Urol Clin North Am. 2002;29(3):725–34, xiPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Hautmann RE et al. Longterm results of standard procedures in urology: the ileal neobladder. World J Urol. 2006;24(3):305–14PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Stein JP, Skinner DG. Results with radical cystectomy for treating bladder cancer: a ‚reference standard‘ for high-grade, invasive bladder cancer. BJU Int. 2003;92(1):12–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Azimuddin K et al. Neoplasia after ureterosigmoidostomy. Dis Colon Rectum. 1999;42(12):1632–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Wiesner C et al. Continent cutaneous urinary diversion: longterm followup of more than 800 patients with ileocecal reservoirs. World J Urol. 2006;24(3):315–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Cookson MS et al. Complications of radical cystectomy for nonmuscle invasive disease: comparison with muscle invasive disease. J Urol. 2003;169(1):101–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Shariat SF, Karakiewicz PI, Palapattu GS, et al. Outcomes of radical cystectomy for transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: a contemporary series from the Bladder Cancer Research Consortium. J Urol. 2006;176(6 Pt 1):2414–22; discussion 22PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Nuhn P et al. External validation of postoperative nomograms for prediction of all-cause mortality, cancer-specific mortality, and recurrence in patients with urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Eur Urol. 2012;61(1):58–64PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Madersbacher S et al. Radical cystectomy for bladder cancer today—a homogeneous series without neoadjuvant therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(4):690–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Bruins HM et al. Clinical outcomes and recurrence predictors of lymph node positive urothelial cancer after cystectomy. J Urol. 2009;182(5):2182–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Ok JH et al. Medical and surgical palliative care of patients with urological malignancies. J Urol. 2005;174(4 Pt 1):1177–82PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    ElTabey NA et al. Bladder cancer with obstructive uremia: oncologic outcome after definitive surgical management. Urology. 2005;66(3):531–5Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Ploussard G et al. Critical analysis of bladder sparing with trimodal therapy in muscleinvasive bladder cancer: a systematic review. European urology. 2014;66(1):120–37PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Quirt JS et al. Patterns of Referral to Radiation Oncology among Patients with Bladder Cancer: a Population-based Study. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2017;29(3):171–9Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Mitin T et al. LongTerm Outcomes Among Patients Who Achieve Complete or Near-Complete Responses After the Induction Phase of Bladder-Preserving Combined-Modality Therapy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of NRG Oncology/RTOG 9906 and 0233. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;94(1):67–74PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  • Florian Janisch
    • 1
    • 2
  • Shahrokh F. Shariat
    • 1
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
    • 7
  • Michael Rink
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Universitätsklinik für UrologieMedizinische Universität WienWienÖsterreich
  2. 2.Klinik und Poliklinik für UrologieUniversitätsklinikum Hamburg-EppendorfHamburgDeutschland
  3. 3.Department of UrologyWeill Cornell Medical CollegeNew YorkUSA
  4. 4.Department of UrologyUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterDallasUSA
  5. 5.Karl Landsteiner Institut für Urologie und AndrologieWienÖsterreich
  6. 6.Institute for Urology and Reproductive HealthSechenov UniversityMoscowRussia
  7. 7.Department of Urology, Second Faculty of MedicineCharles UniversityPragueCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations