A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis on Perioperative Stenting/Dwell Time and Postoperative Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Radical Cystectomy and Urinary Diversion for Bladder Cancer.

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Mithun Kailavasan, Alberto Martini, Max Bruins, Albert Carrion, Richard Cathomas, Eva Compérat, Jason A Efstathiou, Rainer Fietkau, Anna Lorch, Laura S Mertens, Richard P Meijer, Paramanathan Mariappan, Mathew I Milowsky, Yann Neuzillet, Valeria Panebianco, Michael Rink, George N Thalmann, S Sæbjørnsen, Toine van der Heijden
{"title":"A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis on Perioperative Stenting/Dwell Time and Postoperative Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Radical Cystectomy and Urinary Diversion for Bladder Cancer.","authors":"Mithun Kailavasan, Alberto Martini, Max Bruins, Albert Carrion, Richard Cathomas, Eva Compérat, Jason A Efstathiou, Rainer Fietkau, Anna Lorch, Laura S Mertens, Richard P Meijer, Paramanathan Mariappan, Mathew I Milowsky, Yann Neuzillet, Valeria Panebianco, Michael Rink, George N Thalmann, S Sæbjørnsen, Toine van der Heijden","doi":"10.1016/j.euf.2025.05.024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Ureteral stents are used to protect the ureteroenteric anastomosis during radical cystectomy and urinary diversion (RCUD); however, complications can occur from its use. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review of perioperative stenting strategies and postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing RCUD for bladder cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review was published via PROSPERO (CRD42024558468) and conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Medline, Medline In-Process, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. Prospective comparative (randomised and nonrandomised) studies published until June 2024 were included. All outcomes were included in the analysis. Risk of bias assessments were undertaken.</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>The search yielded 1516 abstracts. Six prospective comparative studies (740 patients) were included. Although there was some evidence of reduced postoperative complications (urinary leak, ureteroileal stricture, postoperative obstruction, length of stay, and readmission within 30 d) with the omission of stents during RCUD, this did not reach statistical significance (n = 3). No differences in postoperative complications were identified between internal and external stenting (n = 2). Early stent removal (5 d) was associated with reduced urinary tract infections and hospital readmission (n = 1). There was a high/serious risk of bias with all studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical implications: </strong>The role of perioperative stenting during RCUD in preventing ureteroenteric complications remains equivocal and does not favour one approach over another. Until further results from on-going randomised controlled trials become available, urologists should carefully consider the indications to place a ureteric stent and its retention time after RCUD.</p>","PeriodicalId":12160,"journal":{"name":"European urology focus","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology focus","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2025.05.024","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objective: Ureteral stents are used to protect the ureteroenteric anastomosis during radical cystectomy and urinary diversion (RCUD); however, complications can occur from its use. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review of perioperative stenting strategies and postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing RCUD for bladder cancer.

Methods: This review was published via PROSPERO (CRD42024558468) and conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Medline, Medline In-Process, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. Prospective comparative (randomised and nonrandomised) studies published until June 2024 were included. All outcomes were included in the analysis. Risk of bias assessments were undertaken.

Key findings and limitations: The search yielded 1516 abstracts. Six prospective comparative studies (740 patients) were included. Although there was some evidence of reduced postoperative complications (urinary leak, ureteroileal stricture, postoperative obstruction, length of stay, and readmission within 30 d) with the omission of stents during RCUD, this did not reach statistical significance (n = 3). No differences in postoperative complications were identified between internal and external stenting (n = 2). Early stent removal (5 d) was associated with reduced urinary tract infections and hospital readmission (n = 1). There was a high/serious risk of bias with all studies.

Conclusions and clinical implications: The role of perioperative stenting during RCUD in preventing ureteroenteric complications remains equivocal and does not favour one approach over another. Until further results from on-going randomised controlled trials become available, urologists should carefully consider the indications to place a ureteric stent and its retention time after RCUD.

膀胱癌根治性膀胱切除术和尿改道患者围手术期支架置入/停留时间和术后结果的系统回顾和meta分析。
背景与目的:输尿管支架用于根治性膀胱切除术和尿分流术(RCUD)中输尿管肠吻合处的保护;然而,它的使用可能会引起并发症。本研究的目的是对膀胱癌RCUD患者的围手术期支架置入策略和术后结果进行系统回顾。方法:本综述通过PROSPERO (CRD42024558468)发表,并按照系统评价和meta分析指南的首选报告项目进行。检索了Medline、Medline In-Process、Embase和Cochrane中央对照试验注册库。纳入了2024年6月前发表的前瞻性比较研究(随机和非随机)。所有结果均纳入分析。进行了偏倚风险评估。主要发现和局限性:该搜索产生了1516篇摘要。纳入6项前瞻性比较研究(740例患者)。虽然有证据表明RCUD中不使用支架减少了术后并发症(尿漏、输尿管狭窄、术后梗阻、住院时间、30 d内再入院),但这没有达到统计学意义(n = 3)。内支架置入与外支架置入术后并发症无差异(n = 2)。早期支架取出(5 d)与尿路感染和再入院减少相关(n = 1)。所有研究都存在高/严重的偏倚风险。结论和临床意义:RCUD围手术期支架植入术在预防输尿管肠并发症中的作用仍然是模棱两可的,并且没有一种方法比另一种方法更有利。在正在进行的随机对照试验得到进一步结果之前,泌尿科医生应仔细考虑输尿管支架放置的适应症和RCUD后的保留时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European urology focus
European urology focus Medicine-Urology
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
3.70%
发文量
274
审稿时长
23 days
期刊介绍: European Urology Focus is a new sister journal to European Urology and an official publication of the European Association of Urology (EAU). EU Focus will publish original articles, opinion piece editorials and topical reviews on a wide range of urological issues such as oncology, functional urology, reconstructive urology, laparoscopy, robotic surgery, endourology, female urology, andrology, paediatric urology and sexual medicine. The editorial team welcome basic and translational research articles in the field of urological diseases. Authors may be solicited by the Editor directly. All submitted manuscripts will be peer-reviewed by a panel of experts before being considered for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信