"Bordeaux Neobladder": First Evaluation of the Urodynamic Outcomes.
Bladder cancer
Cystectomy
Laparoscopy
Robotics
Urinary diversion
Urodynamics
Journal
European urology open science
ISSN: 2666-1683
Titre abrégé: Eur Urol Open Sci
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101771568
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2023
Jan 2023
Historique:
accepted:
23
11
2022
entrez:
29
12
2022
pubmed:
30
12
2022
medline:
30
12
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The intracorporeal orthotopic modified-Y "Bordeaux" neobladder (iYNB) was first described in 2016. No urodynamic evaluation of this neobladder has yet been performed. To present the urodynamic features of the iYNB and incontinence-specific health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes. We prospectively assessed 26 patients operated between September 2018 and November 2020. Robotic radical cystectomy for malignant disease of the bladder and iYNB, performed by a single surgeon, were used. Three months after surgery and in November 2021, consenting patients underwent clinical evaluation and multichannel urodynamic study (UDS). The incontinence quality of life (I-QoL) questionnaire was used to evaluate HRQoL. Continence was classified into day- and nighttime, and clinically defined as the use of zero pads. A descriptive statistical analysis was performed. The mean age at surgery was 65.4 yr. The mean follow-up period was 27 mo (12-38). The mean time for the neobladder reconstruction was 192 min (110-340). The mean maximum capacity was 431 cm The UDS evaluation of iYNB demonstrates that both the volumetric and the pressure characteristics are acceptable and may enhance quality of life. Prospective studies with larger numbers of patients and longer follow-up are needed to further evaluate the iYNB. The "Bordeaux" neobladder provides acceptable urodynamic outcomes. It is associated with high levels of health-related quality of life and good rates of continence in patients.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
The intracorporeal orthotopic modified-Y "Bordeaux" neobladder (iYNB) was first described in 2016. No urodynamic evaluation of this neobladder has yet been performed.
Objective
UNASSIGNED
To present the urodynamic features of the iYNB and incontinence-specific health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes.
Design setting and participants
UNASSIGNED
We prospectively assessed 26 patients operated between September 2018 and November 2020.
Surgical procedure
UNASSIGNED
Robotic radical cystectomy for malignant disease of the bladder and iYNB, performed by a single surgeon, were used.
Measurements
UNASSIGNED
Three months after surgery and in November 2021, consenting patients underwent clinical evaluation and multichannel urodynamic study (UDS). The incontinence quality of life (I-QoL) questionnaire was used to evaluate HRQoL. Continence was classified into day- and nighttime, and clinically defined as the use of zero pads. A descriptive statistical analysis was performed.
Results and limitations
UNASSIGNED
The mean age at surgery was 65.4 yr. The mean follow-up period was 27 mo (12-38). The mean time for the neobladder reconstruction was 192 min (110-340). The mean maximum capacity was 431 cm
Conclusions
UNASSIGNED
The UDS evaluation of iYNB demonstrates that both the volumetric and the pressure characteristics are acceptable and may enhance quality of life. Prospective studies with larger numbers of patients and longer follow-up are needed to further evaluate the iYNB.
Patient summary
UNASSIGNED
The "Bordeaux" neobladder provides acceptable urodynamic outcomes. It is associated with high levels of health-related quality of life and good rates of continence in patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36578286
doi: 10.1016/j.euros.2022.11.010
pii: S2666-1683(22)02698-2
pmc: PMC9791315
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
102-109Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Author(s).
Références
J Urol. 2016 Nov;196(5):1549-1557
pubmed: 27423759
Neurourol Urodyn. 2017 Jun;36(5):1243-1260
pubmed: 27917521
Urology. 2013 Dec;82(6):1323-9
pubmed: 24295248
BJU Int. 2012 Aug;110(3):434-44
pubmed: 22177416
Eur Urol. 2016 Feb;69(2):247-53
pubmed: 26164417
Eur Urol. 2016 Feb;69(2):254-5
pubmed: 26277302
Minerva Urol Nephrol. 2022 Oct 05;:
pubmed: 36197699
Urology. 2007 Jan;69(1):74-7
pubmed: 17270620
J Urol. 2002 May;167(5):2052-7
pubmed: 11956437
Eur Urol. 2013 Nov;64(5):734-41
pubmed: 23768634
Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13
pubmed: 15273542
Eur Urol. 2021 Jan;79(1):82-104
pubmed: 32360052
J Urol. 2006 Jul;176(1):161-6
pubmed: 16753394
Eur Urol. 2003 Mar;43(3):219-25
pubmed: 12600423
South Asian J Cancer. 2014 Oct;3(4):223-6
pubmed: 25422810
Eur Urol. 2012 Nov;62(5):891-901
pubmed: 22920581
J Urol. 2014 Dec;192(6):1601-3
pubmed: 25245487
Eur Urol. 2014 Feb;65(2):340-7
pubmed: 24183419
Int J Med Robot. 2018 Dec;14(6):e1955
pubmed: 30141263
World J Urol. 2018 Nov;36(11):1711-1718
pubmed: 29744571
J Robot Surg. 2020 Dec;14(6):813-820
pubmed: 32200541
JAMA. 2013 Nov 27;310(20):2191-4
pubmed: 24141714
Neurourol Urodyn. 2010;29(1):4-20
pubmed: 19941278
World J Urol. 2006 Aug;24(3):305-14
pubmed: 16830152
J Urol. 2018 May;199(5):1302-1311
pubmed: 29275112