RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To determine and summarize the available data on urinary, sexual, and health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) outcomes after traditional radical cystectomy (RC), reproductive organ-preserving RC (ROPRC) and nerve-sparing RC (NSRC) for bladder cancer (BCa) in female patients. METHODS: The PubMed, SCOPUS and Web of Science databases were searched to identify studies reporting functional outcomes in female patients undergoing RC and urinary diversion for the treatment of BCa. The outcomes of interest were voiding function (for orthotopic neobladder [ONB]), sexual function and HRQOL. The following independent variables were derived and included in the meta-analysis: pooled rate of daytime and nighttime continence/incontinence, and intermittent self-catheterization (ISC) rates. Analyses were performed separately for traditional, organ- and/or nerve-sparing surgical approaches. RESULTS: Fifty-three studies comprising 2740 female patients (1201 traditional RC and 1539 organ-/nerve-sparing RC, and 264 nerve-sparing-alone RC) were eligible for qualitative synthesis; 44 studies comprising 2418 female patients were included in the quantitative synthesis. In women with ONB diversion, the pooled rates of daytime continence after traditional RC, ROPRC and NSRC were 75.2%, 79.3% and 71.2%, respectively. The pooled rate of nighttime continence after traditional RC was 59.5%; this rate increased to 70.7% and 71.7% in women who underwent ROPRC and NSRC, respectively. The pooled rate of ISC after traditional RC with ONB diversion in female patients was 27.6% and decreased to 20.6% and 16.8% in patients undergoing ROPRC and NSRC, respectively. The use of different definitions and questionnaires in the assessment of postoperative sexual and HRQOL outcomes did not allow a systematic comparison. CONCLUSIONS: Female organ- and nerve-sparing surgical approaches during RC seem to result in improved voiding function. There is a significant need for well-designed studies exploring sexual and HRQOL outcomes to establish evidence-based management strategies to support a shared decision-making process tailored towards patient expectations and satisfaction. Understanding expected functional, sexual and quality-of-life outcomes is necessary to allow individualized pre- and postoperative counselling and care delivery in female patients planned to undergo RC.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Bexiga Urinária , Derivação Urinária , Incontinência Urinária , Humanos , Feminino , Cistectomia/efeitos adversos , Bexiga Urinária/cirurgia , Incontinência Urinária/epidemiologia , Incontinência Urinária/etiologia , Incontinência Urinária/prevenção & controle , Micção , Derivação Urinária/efeitos adversos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To assess the incidence of ureteric injuries, clinical value of prophylactic ureteric stenting and impact of intra- or postoperative detection of ureteric injuries in patients treated with gynaecological or colorectal surgery. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched for articles published before September 2021 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses statement. Studies were deemed eligible if they evaluated the differences in the rate of ureteric injuries between laparoscopic and open surgery, prophylactic ureteric stenting or not, and those of final treatment success between intra- and postoperative detection in patients who underwent gynaecological or colorectal surgery. RESULTS: Overall, 46 studies were eligible for this meta-analysis. Compared to open surgery, laparoscopic hysterectomy was associated with a higher incidence of ureteric injuries (pooled odds ratio [OR] 2.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.71-2.62), but there was no statistically significant difference in colectomy (pooled OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.77-1.03). Prophylactic ureteric stenting was associated with a lower incidence of ureteric injuries during gynaecological surgery (pooled OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.39-0.96). The number needed to perform ureteric stenting to prevent one ureteric injury was 224 in gynaecological surgery. On the other hand, prophylactic ureteric stenting did not reduce the risk of ureteric injuries during colorectal surgery. Intraoperative detection of a ureteric injury was associated with a lower rate of complication management failure compared to postoperative detection (pooled OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.12-0.41). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic hysterectomy seems to be associated with a higher rate of ureteric injuries compared to an open approach. Prophylactic ureteric stenting seems to reduce this risk during gynaecological surgery. Intraoperative detection of a ureteric injury during abdominal/pelvic surgery improves outcomes, suggesting the need for awareness and proactive problem identification. Further well-designed studies assessing the candidates who are more likely to benefit from prophylactic ureteric stenting including cost analysis are needed.
Assuntos
Laparoscopia , Ureter , Doenças Urológicas , Feminino , Humanos , Ureter/cirurgia , Ureter/lesões , Doenças Urológicas/cirurgia , Laparoscopia/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos em Ginecologia , Doença Iatrogênica/epidemiologia , Doença Iatrogênica/prevenção & controleRESUMO
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To summarize and comment on publications of the last 2 years in the field of endoscopic surgery for benign prostatic enlargement, focusing on similarities and differences of laser and electrosurgery. RECENT FINDINGS: Because of good hemostasis and safety, invasive endoscopic surgery has evolved to a choice of treatment for vulnerable patients with ongoing antithrombotic medication and in same-day surgery. Recent publications show a good perioperative course and no deterioration in the postoperative outcome. Furthermore, alterations to the original surgical techniques of resection, enucleation, and vaporization have increased the preservation rate for antegrade ejaculation, advancing them to an appealing choice of treatment for sexually active men. Favorable outcomes can be achieved in both laser and electrosurgery. Only the choice of the surgical technique determines the outcome. SUMMARY: Various invasive endoscopic surgical techniques are available, offering different advantages and disadvantages for the patient. All of them can be performed with laser and electrosurgery. Therefore, focusing on the proper choice of surgical technique instead of the energy source will guarantee the patient to benefit most.