Purpose: To systematically compare the evidence about surgical outcomes, postoperative complications, and sequelae of Radical cystectomy with urinary diversion with or without stent placement. Material and Methods: A literature search was performed through PubMed, Scopus®, and Web of Science up to December 2023 in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD 42023492384), and the research question was formulated according to the PICOs model. Three comparative studies were identified, 2 randomized and 1 prospective coming from a randomized cohort. Results: The stent group showed higher odds of postoperative major complications (OR 3.00 – 95%CI 1.06; 8.52; P = 0.04) than the stentless group. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups regarding 30-day readmission (P = 0.06), postoperative uretero-ileal anastomotis stricture (UIAS) (P = 0.09), postoperative uretero-ileal anastomotis leak (UIAL) (P = 0.20), postoperative urinary tract infections (UTIs) (P = 0.08), and postoperative ureteral obstruction (P = 0.35). No statistically significant difference between the 2 groups was found regarding UIAS management in terms of ureteral reimplantation (P = 0.28) or dilatation (P = 0.36). Conclusions: Our pooled data analysis shows no statistically significant difference between stentless and stented urinary diversion after radical cystectomy. Stentless could be a reasonable choice when performing diversion during radical cystectomy.

Radical cystectomy with stentless urinary diversion: A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies / A. Veccia, D. Brusa, L. Treccani, S. Malandra, E. Serafin, S. Costantino, F. Cianflone, F. Ditonno, F. Montanaro, F. Fumanelli, M. Ferro, G. Mazzon, R. Autorino, R. Bertolo, A. Antonelli. - In: UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY. - ISSN 1078-1439. - 43:1(2025 Jan), pp. 54-60. [10.1016/j.urolonc.2024.06.025]

Radical cystectomy with stentless urinary diversion: A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

S. Costantino;M. Ferro;
2025

Abstract

Purpose: To systematically compare the evidence about surgical outcomes, postoperative complications, and sequelae of Radical cystectomy with urinary diversion with or without stent placement. Material and Methods: A literature search was performed through PubMed, Scopus®, and Web of Science up to December 2023 in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD 42023492384), and the research question was formulated according to the PICOs model. Three comparative studies were identified, 2 randomized and 1 prospective coming from a randomized cohort. Results: The stent group showed higher odds of postoperative major complications (OR 3.00 – 95%CI 1.06; 8.52; P = 0.04) than the stentless group. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups regarding 30-day readmission (P = 0.06), postoperative uretero-ileal anastomotis stricture (UIAS) (P = 0.09), postoperative uretero-ileal anastomotis leak (UIAL) (P = 0.20), postoperative urinary tract infections (UTIs) (P = 0.08), and postoperative ureteral obstruction (P = 0.35). No statistically significant difference between the 2 groups was found regarding UIAS management in terms of ureteral reimplantation (P = 0.28) or dilatation (P = 0.36). Conclusions: Our pooled data analysis shows no statistically significant difference between stentless and stented urinary diversion after radical cystectomy. Stentless could be a reasonable choice when performing diversion during radical cystectomy.
Radical cystectomy; Stent; Stentless; Urinary diversion
Settore MEDS-14/C - Urologia
gen-2025
20-ago-2024
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
1-s2.0-S1078143924005374-main.pdf

accesso riservato

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 1.5 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.5 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/1126655
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 1
social impact