Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jan-Feb;48(1):18-30.
doi: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2020.0892.

Bricker ileal conduit vs. Cutaneous ureterostomy after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: a systematic review

Fernando Korkes  1   2   3 , Eduardo Fernandes  1 , Felipe Arakaki Gushiken  1 , Felipe Placco Araujo Glina  1 , Willy Baccaglini  1   2   3 , Frederico Timóteo  1   2   3 , Sidney Glina  1
Affiliations

Bricker ileal conduit vs. Cutaneous ureterostomy after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: a systematic review

Fernando Korkes et al. Int Braz J Urol. 2022 Jan-Feb.

Abstract

Purpose: A systematic review of the literature with available published literature to compare ileal conduit (IC) and cutaneous ureterostomy (CU) urinary diversions (UD) in terms of perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes of high-risk elderly patients treated with radical cystectomy (RC). Protocol Registration: PROSPERO ID CRD42020168851.

Materials and methods: A systematic review, according to the PRISMA Statement, was performed. Search through the Medline, Embase, Scopus, Scielo, Lilacs, and Cochrane Database until July 2020.

Results: The literature search yielded 2,883 citations and were selected eight studies, including 1096 patients. A total of 707 patients underwent IC and 389 CU. Surgical procedures and outcomes, complications, mortality, and quality of life were analyzed.

Conclusions: CU seems to be a safe alternative for the elderly and more frail patients. It is associated with faster surgery, less blood loss, lower transfusion rates, a lower necessity of intensive care, and shorter hospital stay. According to most studies, complications are less frequent after CU, even though mortality rates are similar. Studies with long-term follow up are awaited.

Keywords: Cystectomy; Systematic Review [Publication Type]; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Flow diagram of the study selection.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Risk of bias assessment according to Cochrane's Risk of Bias In Nonrandomized Studies - ROBINS-I tool.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, Miller D, Brest A, Yu M, Ruhl J, et al. SEER Cancer Statistics Review (CSR) 1975-2017. Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2017. National Cancer Institute. 2020. [Internet]. Available at. <https://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2017/>
    1. Witjes JA, Bruins HM, Cathomas R, Compérat EM, Cowan NC, Gakis G, et al. European Association of Urology Guidelines on Muscle-invasive and Metastatic Bladder Cancer: Summary of the 2020 Guidelines. Eur Urol. 2021; 79:82-104. - PubMed
    1. Djaladat H, Bruins HM, Miranda G, Cai J, Skinner EC, Daneshmand S. The association of preoperative serum albumin level and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score on early complications and survival of patients undergoing radical cystectomy for urothelial bladder cancer. BJU Int. 2014; 113:887-93. - PubMed
    1. Cassim F, Sinha S, Jaumdally S, Lazarus J. The first series of laparoscopic radical cystectomies done in South Africa. South Afr. J. Surg. 2018;56;44-9.
    1. Barbieri CE, Lee B, Cookson MS, Bingham J, Clark PE, Smith JA Jr, et al. Association of procedure volume with radical cystectomy outcomes in a nationwide database. J Urol. 2007; 178(4 Pt 1):1418-21-2. - PubMed

Publication types