Optimizing decision-making process of benign uretero-enteric anastomotic stricture treatment after radical cystectomy

Abstract

Purpose: To identify preoperative predictors of endo-urological treatment (EUT) failure while promoting a new diagnostic and therapeutic pathway for benign uretero-enteric anastomosis stricture (UES) management after radical cystectomy (RC).

Materials and methods: We relied on a prospectively maintained database including 96 individuals (122 renal units) who developed a benign UES at our institution between 1990 and 2018. UES was classified into two different types according to morphology: FP1 (i.e., sharp or duckbill) and FP2 (i.e., flat or concave). EUT feasibility, success rate, as well as intra and postoperative complications were recorded. Uni- and multivariable logistic regression analysis (MVA) assessed for predictors of EUT failure.

Results: Overall, 78 (63.9%) and 32 (26.3%) cases were defined as FP1 and FP2, respectively. EUT was not feasible in 33 (27.1%) cases. After a median follow-up of 50 (IQR 5-240) months, successful treatment was reached only in 15/122 (12.3%) cases. EUT success rates raised when considering short (< 1 cm) (16.8%), FP1 morphology (16.7%) strictures, or the combination of these characteristics (22.4%). Overall, 5 (5.2%) cases had CD ≥ III complications. FP2 (OR: 1.91, 95%CI 1.21-5.31, p = 0.03) and stricture length ≥ 1 cm (OR: 9.08, 95%CI 2.09-65.71, p = 0.009) were associated with treatment failure at MVA.

Conclusions: Endoscopic treatment for benign UES after RC is feasible but harbors a low success rate. Stricture length and radiological morphology of the stricture are related to endoscopic treatment failure. Surgeons should be aware of the stricture features during the preoperative decision-making process to choose the optimal candidate for endoscopic treatment.

Keywords: Radical cystectomy; Ureteral stricture; Uretero-enteric anastomosis; Urinary diversion.