Does being performed by urologist or gynecologist affect the outcomes of women who have had sacrocolpopexy?

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of women who underwent abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC) by urologist and gynecologist. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 61 women underwent transabdominal sacrocolpopexy, with 31 by a urologist (Group 1) and 30 by a gynecologist (Group 2). The patients were presented with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (POP). The results were evaluated with Baden-Walker system and International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire - Short Form (ICIQ-SF) to assess anatomical and continence outcomes. Postoperative complications were documented based on the Dindo and Clavien Classification. Statistical analyses were done using Mann-Whitney U test and Fisher's exact test with SPSS version 21.0. RESULTS: The mean follow-up time was 21.4 (12-36) and 21.8 (12-36) months for Group 1 and Group 2, respectively (p = 0.72). The mean estimated blood loss and length of hospitalization were similar in both groups. The success rates were; 93.5% for Group 1 and 93.3% for Group 2 (p = 0.89). There was no difference in complication rates between the two groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The fact that it was administered by gynocologist or urologist does not affect the outcomes of sacrocolpopexy surgery. Similar success and complication rates were found in the patients for both groups.

The surgical technique and initial outcomes of Anatolian neobladder: a novel technique of ileal neobladder after radical cystectomy.

BACKGROUND: We describe a detailed novel step-by-step approach for creation of an ileal neobladder and compare the outcomes with standart neobladder. METHODS: Between August 2009 and January 2016, 36 consecutive patients with bladder cancer underwent radical cystectomy and orthotopic urinary diversion with an ileal neobladder. A novel technique of ileal neobladder construction, called the Anatolian neobladder, was designed by a single surgeon (ZT). Demographics and clinical data were collected. Perioperative, oncologic, and functional outcomes were reported. Complications were graded as early or late. These outcomes were compared with patients who underwent standard neobladder during this period in our center. RESULTS: The operation was technically successful in all cases. Early postoperative complications occurred in 33.3% of the patients. Daytime continence was achieved successfully in 83.3% of the patients. No patient had severe metabolic acidosis. Six patients (16.6%) died during follow-up, five due to metastatic bladder cancer and one due to a cardiac problem. There was no any statistically significant difference between novel technique and standard neobladder for oncological and functional outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The Anatolian ileal neobladder is as feasible and safe as standard neobladder technique for urinary diversion in patients with bladder cancer undergoing radical cystectomy.

Management of Bladder Cancer After Renal Transplantation.

OBJECTIVES: In renal transplant recipients, the risk of developing bladder cancer and rate of diagnosis of advanced staged bladder cancer are generally higher than the general population. Also, it is more challenging to treat renal transplant recipients than the regular patient population. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of radical cystectomy (RC) and urinary diversion with ileal conduit in renal transplant recipients. METHODS: We identified 2 patients with prior history of renal transplantation who underwent RC and ileal conduit urinary diversion for bladder cancer. Preoperative clinical and demographic data were presented and outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: The RC and ileal conduit urinary diversion were performed in the first patient 56 months after renal transplantation and in the second patient 64 months after renal transplantation. Clinical staging was high-grade T2 transitional cell cancer of the bladder for patient 1 and T2 with pure squamous cell cancer of the bladder for patient 2. No perioperative or postoperative complication and no graft dysfunction occurred in either patient. CONCLUSION: Our experience demonstrated that RC with ileal conduit reconstruction in renal transplant recipients is safe and feasible.