Value assessment of uretero-enteric anastomosis using Le Due method in the orthotopic ileal neobladder (OINB) in patients with urinary bladder cancer
Article published in Urologia Polska 2002/55/4.

authors

Mieczysław Fryczkowski, Jacek Huk, Andrzej Paradysz, Zofia Krauze-Balwińska: Katedra i Klinika Urologii w Zabrzu Śląskiej Akademii Medycznej w Katowicach Kierownik kliniki: prof, dr hab. Mieczysław Fryczkowski

keywords

urinary bladder, cancer, orthotopic ileal neobladder, uretero-enteric anastomosis modo Le Due

summary

Objective. The aim of this study was the assessment of ureterocntcric anastomosis (UEA) using the Le Due method performed in orthotopic ileal neobladder (OINB) after cystectomy.

Material and methods. In the period between 1991-2001 year, 72 patients in average age 59,1 y-rs, underwent cystectomy and OINB. In all patients the UEA modo Le Due was created. The complet follow-up was performed in 55 patients renged 6-115 months (avarage 41,9), after operation. Postoperative diagnosis was based on; laboratory, radiology examination and 28 patients was also urodynamic examined.

Results. The complication rate of UEA was 25,4% (16,3% of strictures and 9,1 % vescio-uretera refluxes - vur). The most of the complications (86%) occured 12 months after operation. The complication rate of the UEA is not statistical different in analized types of OINB except Pagano neobladder. There was no connection between the staging and grading of bladder cancer and the complications rate.

Conclusion.

1. The UEA made by Le Due method give a lot of strictures and vur in patients with OINB.

2. The complications occuerd most frequently before 12 m-ths of operation and the strictures required early surgical correction, contrary vur.

3. The staging and grading of the bladder cancer had not influence on the complication rate.

4. In the Pagano neobladder we found any complications binding with UEA. We did not find interdependences between UEA and type of OINB except Pagano neobladder becouse it was without complications.

references

1. Fujisawa M, Isotani S, Ishimura T, Yamanaha Y, Arakawa S, Kamidono S; A Novel antireflux uretero-ileal anastomosis for urinary diversion an experimental study. BJU Int 2000; 80:1064-1067.
2. Roth S, Von Ahlen H, Semjonow A, Oberpenning F, Hertle L: Does the success of ureterointerstitial implantation in orthotopic substi-tion depend more on surgeon level of experience or choice of technique. J Urol 1997; 157: 56-59.
3. Fraizer HA, Robertson JE, Paulson DF: Complication of radical cy-stectomy and urinary diversion; A retrospective review of 675 cases in 2 decades. J Urol 1992; 148:2001-2005.
4. Hautman RE, De Pelriconi R, Gottfried EW, Klcinschmidt K, Mattes R, Paiss T: The ileal neobladder complications and functional results in 363patients after 11 years offollowup. J Urol 1999; 161:422-428.
5. Kristjansson A, Abol-Enein I-I, Alm P, Makktor AA, Ghoneim MA,Mansson W: Longterm renal morphology and function following en-leroplasty (reflux or antirefluxing anastomosis); an experimental study. BJU Int 1996; 678:840-844.
6. Studer UE, Danuscr H, Thalman GN, Springer JP, Turner VM: Antireflux nipple or afferent tubular segment in 70patients with ileal low pressure bladder substitutes. Long-term results of a prospective ron-domized trial. J Urol 1996; 156:1113-1117.
7. Muraishi O, Yamaschita T, Ishikawa S, Hara Y, Kakue A: Impmvement of ureleroileal anastomosis in orthotopic ileal neobladder with modified Le Due procedure; short submucosal tunnel technique. J Urol 2001; 165:798-801.
8. Sagalowsky A: Further experience with spirt-cuff nippel ureteral reimplantation in urinary diversion. J Urol 1998; 159: 1843-1847.
9. Minerrini R, Morelli G, Fontana N, Nminervini A, Fiorenlini L:Functional evolution of different ileal neobladder and ureteral reimplantation technique. Eur Urol 1998; 34:198-200.
10. Abol-Encin H, Ghoncin MA: A novel uretero-ileal reimplantation technique; The serous lined extramural tunel. A preliminary report. J Urol 1994; 151:1193-1195.
11. Shaker AA, El Hammady S:Extravesical semmucosa tunnel. A newtechnique of ureteroneocystostomy. BJU Int 1998; 81: 749-751.
12. Studer UE, Casanowa GA, Ackermann DK, Zingg EJ: Real bladder substitute; Antireflux nipple or afferent tubular segment. J Urol 1990: 143, supl. 2:abstr. 837.
13. Carney M, Le Due A:L\\\'enlero-cysto-plastic apres cystoprostatecto-mie totalepour cancer de vesice. Ann Urol 1979; 13:117-123.
14. Le Due A, Carney M, Tcillac P:An orginal antireflux ureteroikal implantation techniques; Long term followup. J Urol 1986; 137:1156-1158.
15. Shaaban AA, Gaballah M, El Diasty TA, Ghoneim MA: Urethral controled bladder substitution. A comparison between the intussu-scepted nipple valve and the technique of\\\'Le Due as antireflux procedure. J Urol 1992; 148:1156-1161.
16. Schwaibold H, Friedrich MG, Ferenandez S, Conrad S, Huland H:Improvement of ureteroikal anastomosis in continent urinaiy diversion with modified Le Due procedure. J Urol 1998; 160: 718-721.
17. Lugagae PM, Herre JM, Leber! P, Barre R Mollier S, Botto R: Ureleroileal implantation in orthotopic neobladder with the Le Due - Carney mucosal through technique. Risk of stenosis and long-term followup. J Urol 1997; 158:765-767.
18. Lippert MC, Theodoreseu D: 77ii? Hautmann neobladder with Chimney a Versatile modification. J Urol 1997; 158:1610-1612.
19. Pi Marw DS, Le Roy AJ, Thicling S, Bcrgstralh-Scgura JW: Long--term results of treatment for ureteroenteric strictures. J Urol 2001; 58: 909-913.

correspondence