Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Mixed histology bladder cancer as a complication of clam ileocystoplasty
  1. Lawrence Nip1,
  2. Emil Salmo2,
  3. Raveendra Surange1 and
  4. John Calleary1
  1. 1Department of Urology, Northern Care Alliance NHS Group, Manchester, UK
  2. 2Department of Histopathology, Northern Care Alliance NHS Group, Oldham, UK
  1. Correspondence to Lawrence Nip; lawrence.nip.12{at}ucl.ac.uk

Abstract

A 58-year-old woman with a previous clam ileocystoplasty was referred to the urology department for the investigation of haematuria. CT urogram showed a large left-sided soft tissue mass arising from the bladder. Histological analysis of the shavings from transurethral resection revealed a G3pT2 transitional cell carcinoma and T4N1Mx adenocarcinoma. The patient was referred to oncology for the discussion of palliative chemotherapy; however, in the interim she deteriorated and was admitted to hospital with a post-renal acute kidney injury. A right-sided nephrostomy was inserted relieving her obstruction and she subsequently made a good recovery. This case report illustrates the difficulties in the long-term follow-up of patients having undergone what is now a rarely performed procedure. In the absence of regular cystoscopic follow-up post ileocystoplasty, malignancy may present late and with complications from advanced disease.

  • urology
  • haematuria
  • urological surgery
  • urological cancer

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Contributors LN was responsible for the literature search, collecting data relevant to the case, drafting the manuscript and final approval of the version to be published. LN is a guarantor and accepts full responsibility for the work and/or the conduct of the study, had access to the data and controlled the decision to publish. ES was responsible for collecting data relevant to the case, editing the manuscript and final approval of the version to be published. RS made a substantial contribution to the conception of the work, editing the manuscript and final approval of the version to be published. JC was responsible for editing the manuscript and final approval of the version to be published. JC is a guarantor and accepts full responsibility for the work and/or the conduct of the study, had access to the data and controlled the decision to publish.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent for publication Obtained.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.