Preview

Urology Herald

Advanced search

Delayed complications of radical cystectomy considering urinary diversion methods: non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer and cancer with minimal muscle invasion

https://doi.org/10.21886/2308-6424-2026-14-1-71-82

Abstract

Introduction. Radical cystectomy (RC) effectively controls bladder cancer but carries a > 50% 90-day complication rate, 15 – 20% severe complications, and 2% mortality. Most short- and long-term complications relate to urinary diversion rather than RC itself.

Objective. To evaluate the incidence and profile of delayed postoperative complications following RC by urinary diversion method in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) and minimal intradetrusor-invasive muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC).

Materials & methods. This study included 49 patients with high-risk progressive NMIBC (group 1) and 102 with MIBC exhibiting minimal intradetrusor invasion (group 2) who underwent RC.

Results. Delayed complications occurred in 10.9 ± 4.9 (group 1) versus 12.1 ± 3.5 cases per 100 patients (group 2; no significant difference). Diversion-related complications were 5.5 times more frequent than non-diversion-related ones. Proportions of affected patients were similar (39.1% vs 39.4%), but case prevalence was higher in group 2 (71.7 ± 8.5 vs 60.9 ± 11.5 per 100; p > 0.05). Internal diversion showed the highest risk (266.7 ± 66.7 per 100), while inverted ileocystoplasty was most favourable (34.8 ± 12.3 per 100). Bricker diversion had the lowest corrective surgery rate (6.3 ± 4.4 per 100).

Conclusion. Delayed diversion-related and urological complications were more prevalent in minimal MIBC, with higher corrective surgeries in NMIBC. Internal diversion performed poorly, whereas orthotopic inverted ileocystoplasty offered optimal outcomes.

About the Authors

V. A. Khomyakov
Rostov State Medical University
Russian Federation

Vladimir A. Khomyakov

Rostov-on-Don


Competing Interests:

The article underwent the journal's standard peer-review process by independent experts. The authors declare no other conflicts of interest and report no relationships, activities, or interests over the past three years involving third parties (commercial or non-commercial) that could influence — or be perceived to influence — the content of this article



O. N. Vasilyev
Rostov State Medical University
Russian Federation

Oleg N. Vasilyev — Dr.Sc.(Med), Assoc.Prof. (Docent)

Rostov-on-Don


Competing Interests:

The article underwent the journal's standard peer-review process by independent experts. The authors declare no other conflicts of interest and report no relationships, activities, or interests over the past three years involving third parties (commercial or non-commercial) that could influence — or be perceived to influence — the content of this article



V. A. Perepechay
Rostov State Medical University
Russian Federation

Vadim A. Perepechay — Dr.Sc.(Med), Assoc.Prof. (Docent)

Rostov-on-Don


Competing Interests:

The article underwent the journal's standard peer-review process by independent experts. The authors declare no other conflicts of interest and report no relationships, activities, or interests over the past three years involving third parties (commercial or non-commercial) that could influence — or be perceived to influence — the content of this article



A. V. Ilyash
Rostov State Medical University
Russian Federation

Anna V. Ilyash — Cand.Sc.(Med)

Rostov-on-Don


Competing Interests:

Author Anna V. Iliash is a member of the Editorial board of Urology Herald.



M. G. Loskutov
Rostov State Medical University
Russian Federation

Mikhail G. Loskutov

Rostov-on-Don


Competing Interests:

The article underwent the journal's standard peer-review process by independent experts. The authors declare no other conflicts of interest and report no relationships, activities, or interests over the past three years involving third parties (commercial or non-commercial) that could influence — or be perceived to influence — the content of this article



B. G. Amirbekov
Rostov State Medical University
Russian Federation

Beykes G. Amirbekov

Rostov-on-Don


Competing Interests:

The article underwent the journal's standard peer-review process by independent experts. The authors declare no other conflicts of interest and report no relationships, activities, or interests over the past three years involving third parties (commercial or non-commercial) that could influence — or be perceived to influence — the content of this article



References

1. Khetrapal P, Wong JKL, Tan WP, Rupasinghe T, Tan WS, Williams SB, Boorjian SA, Wijburg C, Parekh DJ, Wiklund P, Vasdev N, Khan MS, Guru KA, Catto JWF, Kelly JD. Robot-assisted Radical Cystectomy Versus Open Radical Cystectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Perioperative, Oncological, and Quality of Life Outcomes Using Randomized Controlled Trials. Eur Urol. 2023;84(4):393-405. Erratum in: Eur Urol. 2023;84(4):e98-e99. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.04.004

2. Tinoco CL, Lima E. Urinary diversions for radical cystectomy: a review of complications and their management. Mini-invasive Surg. 2021;5:28. DOI: 10.20517/2574-1225.2021.35

3. Shimko MS, Tollefson MK, Umbreit EC, Farmer SA, Blute ML, Frank I. Long-term complications of conduit urinary diversion. J Urol. 2011;185(2):562-567. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.09.096

4. Hautmann RE, de Petriconi RC, Volkmer BG. 25 years of experience with 1,000 neobladders: long-term complications. J Urol. 2011;185(6):2207- 2212. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.02.006

5. Abusal F, Alawadi A, Akpala A, Obeidat S, Al-Omari N, Alsharief M, Shalaby A, Shaukat Z, Sarkar D. Long-Term Complications and Quality of Life After Urinary Diversion for Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cureus. 2025;17(5):e84744. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.84744

6. Rai BP, Bondad J, Vasdev N, Adshead J, Lane T, Ahmed K, Khan MS, Dasgupta P, Guru K, Chlosta PL, Aboumarzouk OM. Robotic versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;4(4):CD011903. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011903.pub2

7. Wilson TG, Guru K, Rosen RC, Wiklund P, Annerstedt M, Bochner BH, Chan KG, Montorsi F, Mottrie A, Murphy D, Novara G, Peabody JO, Palou Redorta J, Skinner EC, Thalmann G, Stenzl A, Yuh B, Catto J; Pasadena Consensus Panel. Best practices in robot-assisted radical cystectomy and urinary reconstruction: recommendations of the Pasadena Consensus Panel. Eur Urol. 2015;67(3):363-375. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.12.009

8. Presicce F, Leonardo C, Tuderti G, Brassetti A, Mastroianni R, Bove A, Misuraca L, Anceschi U, Ferriero M, Gallucci M, Simone G. Late complications of robot-assisted radical cystectomy with totally intracorporeal urinary diversion. World J Urol. 2021;39(6):1903-1909. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-020-03378-7

9. Madersbacher S, Schmidt J, Eberle JM, Thoeny HC, Burkhard F, Hochreiter W, Studer UE. Long-term outcome of ileal conduit diversion. J Urol. 2003;169(3):985-990. DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000051462.45388.14

10. Wood DP Jr, Bianco FJ Jr, Pontes JE, Heath MA, DaJusta D. Incidence and significance of positive urine cultures in patients with an orthotopic neobladder. J Urol. 2003;169(6):2196-2199. DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000067909.98836.91

11. Vasilyev O.N., Perepechay V.A., Ryzhkin A.V. Radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: early and late postoperative complications. Urology Herald. 2019;7(2):24-50. (In Russian). DOI: 10.21886/2308-6424-2019-7-2-24-50

12. Al Hussein Al Awamlh B, Wang LC, Nguyen DP, Rieken M, Lee RK, Lee DJ, Flynn T, Chrystal J, Shariat SF, Scherr DS. Is continent cutaneous urinary diversion a suitable alternative to orthotopic bladder substitute and ileal conduit after cystectomy? BJU Int. 2015;116(5):805-814. DOI: 10.1111/bju.12919

13. Pattou M, Baboudjian M, Pinar U, Parra J, Rouprêt M, Karsenty G, Phe V. Continent cutaneous urinary diversion with an ileal pouch with the Mitrofanoff principle versus a Miami pouch in patients undergoing cystectomy for bladder cancer: results of a comparative study. World J Urol. 2022;40(5):1159-1165. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-022-03954-z

14. Igel DA, Chestnut CJ, Lee EK. Urinary diversion and reconstruction following radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: a narrative review. AME Med J. 2021;6:4. DOI: 10.21037/amj-20-76


Review

For citations:


Khomyakov V.A., Vasilyev O.N., Perepechay V.A., Ilyash A.V., Loskutov M.G., Amirbekov B.G. Delayed complications of radical cystectomy considering urinary diversion methods: non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer and cancer with minimal muscle invasion. Urology Herald. 2026;14(1):71-82. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21886/2308-6424-2026-14-1-71-82

Views: 542

JATS XML


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2308-6424 (Online)