A modified ileal conduit technique in patients undergoing radical cystectomy: Single-centre experience.

Objective: We aimed to evaluate perioperative outcomes and complications of a modified technique of ileal conduit diversion. Methods: Forty-seven cases of radical cystectomy with modified ileal conduit diversion were performed at our institution from January 2015 to January 2020. After radical cystectomy, a segment of ileum was used to pack the conduit and was placed below the digestive anastomosis. Then, the mesentery window of the ileo-ileal anastomosis was sutured. The ureters were anastomosed on their native side on single loop ureteral stents. All procedures were performed by a single surgical team. Intra- and postoperative complications were classified and reported according to the Satava and Clavien–Dindo grading systems. Results: The mean age of population was 66.40±10.14 years, and 76.6% were male. Concomitant diabetes was found in 31.9% of patients. About three quarters of patients had T2G3 bladder cancer. Mean blood loss was 449.36±246.50 ml, and hospitalization was 10.32±5 days. With a mean follow-up of 17.36±12.63 months, the recurrence rate was 17%, and 14.9% of patients died of bladder cancer. Out of the 47 patients, three (4.3%) experienced intraoperative complications, while 15 (31.9%) had postoperative complications. Of these, only three patients experienced Clavien–Dindo complications ⩾grade 3. Multivariate logistic regression model showed that diabetes (p =0.023) and higher blood loss (p =0.010) were significantly associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications. We reported one case of ureterointestinal anastomosis stenosis on the left side and none on the right side. Despite our results being promising, larger randomized trials with longer follow-up are needed to explore further the feasibility of this technique on a larger scale. Conclusion: We describe a safe and simple surgical technique with a similar postoperative complications rate and a lower incidence of ureteroileal anastomosis stenosis compared to the standard technique. Level of evidence: 4. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]