Cargando…

Three-port approach vs standard laparoscopic radical cystectomy with an ileal conduit: a single-centre retrospective study

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of the three-port approach and conventional five-port laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC) with an ileal conduit. METHODS: Eighty-four patients, who were diagnosed with high-risk non-muscle-invasive and muscle-invasive bladder carcinoma and underw...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tuo, Zhouting, Zhang, Ying, Wang, Jinyou, Zhou, Huan, Lu, Youlu, Wang, Xin, Yang, Chao, Yu, Dexin, Bi, Liangkuan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8591944/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34781963
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-021-00920-6
_version_ 1784599364104093696
author Tuo, Zhouting
Zhang, Ying
Wang, Jinyou
Zhou, Huan
Lu, Youlu
Wang, Xin
Yang, Chao
Yu, Dexin
Bi, Liangkuan
author_facet Tuo, Zhouting
Zhang, Ying
Wang, Jinyou
Zhou, Huan
Lu, Youlu
Wang, Xin
Yang, Chao
Yu, Dexin
Bi, Liangkuan
author_sort Tuo, Zhouting
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of the three-port approach and conventional five-port laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC) with an ileal conduit. METHODS: Eighty-four patients, who were diagnosed with high-risk non-muscle-invasive and muscle-invasive bladder carcinoma and underwent LRC with an ileal conduit between January 2018 and April 2020, were retrospectively evaluated. Thirty and fifty-four patients respectively underwent the three-port approach and five-port LRC. Clinical characteristics, pathological data, perioperative outcomes, and follow-up data were analysed. RESULTS: There were no differences in perioperatively surgical outcome, including pathology type, prostate adenocarcinoma incidence, tumour staging, and postoperative creatinine levels between the two groups. The operative time (271.3 ± 24.03 vs. 279.57 ± 48.47 min, P = 0.299), estimated blood loss (65 vs. 90 mL, P = 0.352), time to passage of flatus (8 vs. 10 days, P = 0.084), and duration of hospitalisation post-surgery (11 vs. 12 days, P = 0.922) were no clear difference between both groups. Compared with the five-port group, the three-port LRC group was related to lower inpatient costs (12 453 vs. 14 134 $, P = 0.021). Our follow-up results indicated that the rate of postoperative complications, 90-day mortality, and the oncological outcome did not show meaningful differences between these two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Three-port LRC with an ileal conduit is technically safe and feasible for the treatment of bladder cancer. On comparing the three-port LRC with the five-port LRC, our technique does not increase the rate of short-term and long-term complications and tumour recurrence, but the treatment costs of the former were reduced.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8591944
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85919442021-11-15 Three-port approach vs standard laparoscopic radical cystectomy with an ileal conduit: a single-centre retrospective study Tuo, Zhouting Zhang, Ying Wang, Jinyou Zhou, Huan Lu, Youlu Wang, Xin Yang, Chao Yu, Dexin Bi, Liangkuan BMC Urol Research BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of the three-port approach and conventional five-port laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC) with an ileal conduit. METHODS: Eighty-four patients, who were diagnosed with high-risk non-muscle-invasive and muscle-invasive bladder carcinoma and underwent LRC with an ileal conduit between January 2018 and April 2020, were retrospectively evaluated. Thirty and fifty-four patients respectively underwent the three-port approach and five-port LRC. Clinical characteristics, pathological data, perioperative outcomes, and follow-up data were analysed. RESULTS: There were no differences in perioperatively surgical outcome, including pathology type, prostate adenocarcinoma incidence, tumour staging, and postoperative creatinine levels between the two groups. The operative time (271.3 ± 24.03 vs. 279.57 ± 48.47 min, P = 0.299), estimated blood loss (65 vs. 90 mL, P = 0.352), time to passage of flatus (8 vs. 10 days, P = 0.084), and duration of hospitalisation post-surgery (11 vs. 12 days, P = 0.922) were no clear difference between both groups. Compared with the five-port group, the three-port LRC group was related to lower inpatient costs (12 453 vs. 14 134 $, P = 0.021). Our follow-up results indicated that the rate of postoperative complications, 90-day mortality, and the oncological outcome did not show meaningful differences between these two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Three-port LRC with an ileal conduit is technically safe and feasible for the treatment of bladder cancer. On comparing the three-port LRC with the five-port LRC, our technique does not increase the rate of short-term and long-term complications and tumour recurrence, but the treatment costs of the former were reduced. BioMed Central 2021-11-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8591944/ /pubmed/34781963 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-021-00920-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Tuo, Zhouting
Zhang, Ying
Wang, Jinyou
Zhou, Huan
Lu, Youlu
Wang, Xin
Yang, Chao
Yu, Dexin
Bi, Liangkuan
Three-port approach vs standard laparoscopic radical cystectomy with an ileal conduit: a single-centre retrospective study
title Three-port approach vs standard laparoscopic radical cystectomy with an ileal conduit: a single-centre retrospective study
title_full Three-port approach vs standard laparoscopic radical cystectomy with an ileal conduit: a single-centre retrospective study
title_fullStr Three-port approach vs standard laparoscopic radical cystectomy with an ileal conduit: a single-centre retrospective study
title_full_unstemmed Three-port approach vs standard laparoscopic radical cystectomy with an ileal conduit: a single-centre retrospective study
title_short Three-port approach vs standard laparoscopic radical cystectomy with an ileal conduit: a single-centre retrospective study
title_sort three-port approach vs standard laparoscopic radical cystectomy with an ileal conduit: a single-centre retrospective study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8591944/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34781963
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-021-00920-6
work_keys_str_mv AT tuozhouting threeportapproachvsstandardlaparoscopicradicalcystectomywithanilealconduitasinglecentreretrospectivestudy
AT zhangying threeportapproachvsstandardlaparoscopicradicalcystectomywithanilealconduitasinglecentreretrospectivestudy
AT wangjinyou threeportapproachvsstandardlaparoscopicradicalcystectomywithanilealconduitasinglecentreretrospectivestudy
AT zhouhuan threeportapproachvsstandardlaparoscopicradicalcystectomywithanilealconduitasinglecentreretrospectivestudy
AT luyoulu threeportapproachvsstandardlaparoscopicradicalcystectomywithanilealconduitasinglecentreretrospectivestudy
AT wangxin threeportapproachvsstandardlaparoscopicradicalcystectomywithanilealconduitasinglecentreretrospectivestudy
AT yangchao threeportapproachvsstandardlaparoscopicradicalcystectomywithanilealconduitasinglecentreretrospectivestudy
AT yudexin threeportapproachvsstandardlaparoscopicradicalcystectomywithanilealconduitasinglecentreretrospectivestudy
AT biliangkuan threeportapproachvsstandardlaparoscopicradicalcystectomywithanilealconduitasinglecentreretrospectivestudy