Escudero Barrilero A, Fernández Fernández E, Jiménez Cidre M, Maganto Pavón E, Mayayo Dehesa T, Rodríguez Rodríguez R, Galbis San Juan F, Burgos Revilla F J
Servicio de Urología, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Alcalá de Henares y Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Madrid.
Actas Urol Esp. 1997 Jun;21(6):572-89.
The most widespread opinion, and until recently the only option, is that every vesical transitional cancer invading the muscle is, regardless its extent, candidate for radical cystectomy and that in spite of nobody questioning the advantages of partial cystectomy.
45 patients with vesical infiltrant cancer T2 or higher, followed between 9 and 258 months and managed with partial cystectomy, were analyzed. Only patients with no radiotherapy were included and only in one patient pre-operative chemotherapy was used.
In 8 patients no tumour was found in the specimen (pTO). Tumour grade was pTa in 2; pT1 in 11; pT2 in 5; pT3a in 4; pT3b in 11; and pX in 4 patients. Eight (8) patients had nodal involvement. Twenty-one (21) cases showed bladder relapse. In six (6), vesical infiltrant relapse was associated to metastasis. One case showed vesical relapse, pelvic mass and metastasis, and 4 only metastasis. Extravesical disease-free time and survival are better than in the group treated with radical cystectomy. But this is a highly selected group.
With the same prospects of extravesical disease-free time and survival we offer: shorter, less risky surgery with low post-surgical morbidity and mortality and less hospitalization and proportion of late sequela. Better quality of life, with no skin stoma, incontinence or impotence Although the risk of vesical relapse persists, the procedures required to resolve vesical shunt or replacement complications are more aggressive than TUR sufficient to treat most relapses, and when recurrence is infiltrant radical cystectomy may be used as a rescue measure. This is so even now with the profusion of the so-called "mini-invasive" procedures. We believe that neither radio- and/or chemotherapy combinations contribute nothing to partial cystectomy alone. They may even be harmful and have significant side-effects. It is plain that POs are the result of total removal by TUR. Due to the little reliability when defining T, it is very hard to evaluate the contribution of adjuvant measures. Patients with no vesical tumour (pTOs) or pT1-pT2 tumours, and even up to pT3a, should not be included in protocols to evaluate the efficacy of combined cytostatic agents since their use is superfluous. Radiotherapy makes no contribution to this type of tumour in terms of local relapse and apparently has no effect on the metastasis.
最普遍的观点,并且直到最近还是唯一的选择,是每一例侵犯肌肉的膀胱移行癌,无论其侵犯范围如何,都应行根治性膀胱切除术,尽管没有人质疑部分膀胱切除术的优点。
分析了45例T2期或更高分期的膀胱浸润性癌患者,随访时间为9至258个月,均接受了部分膀胱切除术。仅纳入未接受放疗的患者,仅1例患者使用了术前化疗。
8例患者的标本中未发现肿瘤(pTO)。肿瘤分级为pTa的2例;pT1的11例;pT2的5例;pT3a的4例;pT3b的11例;pX的4例。8例患者有淋巴结转移。21例出现膀胱复发。6例中,膀胱浸润性复发与转移相关。1例出现膀胱复发、盆腔肿块和转移,4例仅有转移。膀胱外无病生存期和生存率优于接受根治性膀胱切除术的组。但这是一个高度选择的组。
在膀胱外无病生存期和生存率相同的前景下,我们提供:手术时间更短、风险更低,术后发病率和死亡率低,住院时间短,晚期后遗症比例低。生活质量更好,无皮肤造口、尿失禁或阳痿。尽管膀胱复发的风险仍然存在,但解决膀胱分流或替代并发症所需的手术比经尿道膀胱肿瘤切除术(TUR)更积极,足以治疗大多数复发,当复发为浸润性时,根治性膀胱切除术可作为挽救措施。即使在现在有大量所谓“微创”手术的情况下也是如此。我们认为,放疗和/或化疗联合使用对单纯部分膀胱切除术没有任何帮助。它们甚至可能有害且有显著的副作用。显然,pTO是经尿道膀胱肿瘤切除术完全切除的结果。由于在定义T时可靠性较低,很难评估辅助措施的作用。无膀胱肿瘤(pTOs)或pT1 - pT2肿瘤,甚至高达pT3a的患者,不应纳入评估联合细胞毒性药物疗效的方案中,因为使用这些药物是多余的。放疗对这类肿瘤的局部复发没有作用,显然对转移也没有影响。