Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Clinical Outcomes After Urinary Diversion for Malignant Ureteral Obstruction Secondary to Non-urologic Cancer: An Analysis of 778 Cases

  • Urologic Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

This study investigated patient outcomes after urinary diversion in order to manage malignant ureteral obstruction caused by non-urologic cancers and to evaluate predictive factors for overall survival.

Methods

The study retrospectively reviewed patients with non-urologic malignancies who underwent ureteral stenting or percutaneous nephrostomy for ureteral obstruction between 2006 and 2014. The variables for predicting overall survival were identified by Cox regression analysis.

Results

The study enrolled 778 patients, including 522 patients who underwent ureteral stenting and 256 patients who underwent percutaneous nephrostomy. Renal function was assessed immediately and then 2 weeks after urinary diversion. The median survival period was 5 months (interquartile range [IQR] 2–12 months). A total of 708 patients died. The patients who received chemotherapy after urinary diversion had a survival gain of 7 months compared with the patients who did not receive subsequent chemotherapy (p < 0.001). The survival rate did not differ between the various types of urinary diversion (p = 0.451). In the multivariate analysis, lower survival rates were significantly associated with male sex; previous chemotherapy without radiotherapy; an increasing number of events related to malignant dissemination; low preoperative hemoglobin (< 10 mg/dL), albumin (< 3 g/dL), and estimated glomerular filtration (< 60 mL/min/1.73 m2) rates; and no subsequent chemotherapy or radiotherapy.

Conclusions

In cases of ureteral obstruction caused by non-urologic malignancies, the overall survival was poor. However, the patients who received chemotherapy after urinary diversion had a survival gain of 7 months. Therefore, urinary diversion could be considered to preserve renal function for subsequent chemotherapy, whereas patients with the poor prognostic factors should be presented with the option of no intervention.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Prentice J, Amer T, Tasleem A, Aboumarzouk O. Malignant ureteric obstruction decompression: how much gain for how much pain? A narrative review. J R Soc Med. 2018;111:125–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kouba E, Wallen EM, Pruthi RS. Management of ureteral obstruction due to advanced malignancy: optimizing therapeutic and palliative outcomes. J Urol. 2008;180:444–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Shekarriz B, Shekarriz H, Upadhyay J, et al. Outcome of palliative urinary diversion in the treatment of advanced malignancies. Cancer. 1999;85:998–1003.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Chung SY, Stein RJ, Landsittel D, et al. 15-Year experience with the management of extrinsic ureteral obstruction with indwelling ureteral stents. J Urol. 2004;172:592–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cordeiro MD, Coelho RF, Chade DC, et al. A prognostic model for survival after palliative urinary diversion for malignant ureteric obstruction: a prospective study of 208 patients. BJU Int. 2016;117:266–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Jeong IG, Han KS, Joung JY, Seo HK, Chung J. The outcome with ureteric stents for managing non-urological malignant ureteric obstruction. BJU Int. 2007;100:1288–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Wong LM, Cleeve LK, Milner AD, Pitman AG. Malignant ureteral obstruction: outcomes after intervention: have things changed? J Urol. 2007;178:178–83; discussion 183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. NICE Guidance–Prostate cancer: diagnosis and management: (c) NICE (2019) prostate cancer: diagnosis and management. BJU Int. 2019;124:9–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Sountoulides P, Pardalidis N, Sofikitis N. Endourologic management of malignant ureteral obstruction: indications, results, and quality-of-life issues. J Endourol. 2010;24:129–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Aravantinos E, Anagnostou T, Karatzas AD, Papakonstantinou W, Samarinas M, Melekos MD. Percutaneous nephrostomy in patients with tumors of advanced stage: treatment dilemmas and impact on clinical course and quality of life. J Endourol. 2007;21:1297–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kanou T, Fujiyama C, Nishimura K, Tokuda Y, Uozumi J, Masaki Z. Management of extrinsic malignant ureteral obstruction with urinary diversion. Int J Urol. 2007;14:689–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Yoon JH, Park S, Park S, Moon KH, Cheon SH, Kwon T. Renal function is associated with prognosis in stent-change therapy for malignant ureteral obstruction. Investig Clin Urol. 2018;59:376–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ishioka J, Kageyama Y, Inoue M, Higashi Y, Kihara K. Prognostic model for predicting survival after palliative urinary diversion for ureteral obstruction: analysis of 140 cases. J Urol. 2008;180:618–21; discussion 621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Migita K, Watanabe A, Samma S, Ohyama T, Ishikawa H, Kagebayashi Y. Clinical outcome and management of ureteral obstruction secondary to gastric cancer. World J Surg. 2011;35:1035–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Izumi K, Mizokami A, Maeda Y, Koh E, Namiki M. Current outcome of patients with ureteral stents for the management of malignant ureteral obstruction. J Urol. 2011;185:556–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Nariculam J, Murphy DG, Jenner C, et al. Nephrostomy insertion for patients with bilateral ureteric obstruction caused by prostate cancer. Br J Radiol. 2009;82:571–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Jalbani MH, Deenari RA, Dholia KR, Oad AK, Arbani IA. Role of percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) in malignant ureteral obstruction. J Pak Med Assoc. 2010;60:280–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wilson JR, Urwin GH, Stower MJ. The role of percutaneous nephrostomy in malignant ureteric obstruction. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2005;87:21–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Allen DJ, Longhorn SE, Philp T, Smith RD, Choong S. Percutaneous urinary drainage and ureteric stenting in malignant disease. Clin Oncol R Coll Radiol. 2010;22:733–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Feng MI, Bellman GC, Shapiro CE. Management of ureteral obstruction secondary to pelvic malignancies. J Endourol. 1999;13:521–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Ganatra AM, Loughlin KR. The management of malignant ureteral obstruction treated with ureteral stents. J Urol. 2005;174:2125–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Alawneh A, Tuqan W, Innabi A, et al. Clinical factors associated with a short survival time after percutaneous nephrostomy for ureteric obstruction in cancer patients: an updated model. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2016;51:255–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Won Sik Jang MD.

Ethics declarations

Disclosure

There are no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Heo, J.E., Jeon, D.Y., Lee, J. et al. Clinical Outcomes After Urinary Diversion for Malignant Ureteral Obstruction Secondary to Non-urologic Cancer: An Analysis of 778 Cases. Ann Surg Oncol 28, 2367–2373 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-09423-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-09423-4

Navigation