Medscape is available in 5 Language Editions – Choose your Edition here.


Partial Cystectomy Workup

  • Author: E Jason Abel, MD; Chief Editor: Bradley Fields Schwartz, DO, FACS  more...
Updated: Mar 26, 2014

Laboratory Studies

Laboratory evaluation is performed for diagnosis and surgical preparation. Diagnostic laboratory evaluation for urothelial cancer may include urinalysis, cytology, and urinary tumor marker levels.

Urinalysis can be used to detect microscopic and gross hematuria.

Conventional microscopic urine cytology may reveal tumor cells. Limitations of cytology include human interpretation and varying sensitivity. Urine cytology relies on a trained pathologist for examination. Thus, low-grade well-differentiated urothelial tumor cells that appear cytologically normal can contribute to a false negative rate of approximately 20%. In addition, well-differentiated tumors are thought to be more cohesive; thus cytology has a lower yield. For these low-grade well-differentiated tumors, cytology sensitivity can range from 35-65%. Conversely, for high-grade urothelial tumors, cytology can be highly specific and have very few false negative results. The false positive rate for urine cytology is approximately 1-12%, mostly due to urothelial atypia, inflammation, or changes associated with chemotherapy or radiation.

The search for more sensitive and specific urothelial tumor markers with the goal of decreasing the need for invasive procedures has led to the development of multiple molecular biology–based tests. These include tests targeting bladder tumor antigen (BTA) (BTA stat test and BTA TRAK test), nuclear matrix protein 22 (NMP-22), fibrin degradation products (FDPs), telomerase, hyaluronic acid and hyaluronidase, cytokeratins, Lewis X antigen, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), soluble Fas, and surviving. Other tests include microsatellite analyses, fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) assays, and immunocytologic tests. Of these numerous markers under investigation, 6 are currently FDA approved for bladder cancer surveillance, including BTA, ImmunoCyt, NMP-22, and FISH.

BTA assays are based on an antibody-detectable tumor marker that is used to detect BTA, a basement membrane antigen released when cancer cells are invading and breaking down basement membrane.

The BTA stat test is used to identify a protein similar to human complement factor H. Bladder cancer cells exhibit factor H, which interacts with complement C3b to inhibit the membrane attack complex and protects from immune attack.

NMP-22 is a nuclear matrix protein associated with DNA replication. Higher levels of NMP-22 have been found in the urine of patients with bladder cancer.

Bladder cancer cells produce vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) to support angiogenesis. VEGF increases vessel wall permeability of blood and plasma proteins, such as plasminogen, fibrinogen, and other clotting factors. Escaped factors result in a fibrin clot that is broken down into FDPs, which are then released into the urine. Increased urinary FDPs have been observed in patients with bladder cancer.

Multiple chromosome alterations have been associated with bladder cancer. FISH is a technique that involves fluorescently labeled DNA probes to assess cells for chromosomal alterations. FISH can be used to identify cells in the urine that have the chromosomal abnormalities consistent with urothelial cancer.

ImmunoCyt is an immunocytochemistry assay that utilizes a mixture of 3 monoclonal antibodies that can detect bladder tumor cells in the urine.

Although most of the new tumor markers yield a better sensitivity than conventional urinary cytology, their specificity is not as good as conventional methods. A recent comparison of the urinary markers reported a sensitivity of 12-85% for cytology, 53-78% for BTA-Stat, 51-100% for BTA-TRAK, 50-65% for NMP-22, 50-65% for ImmunoCyt, and 69-100% for FISH.

The same study reported specificity of 78-100% for cytology, 69-87% for BTA-Stat, 73-93% for BTA-Trak, 60-95% for NMP-22, 62-78% for ImmunoCyt, and 65-96% for FISH. Some promising investigational tests are underway for telomorase and BLCA-4. BLCA-4 is a nuclear matrix protein with early reports suggesting it may have both high sensitivity and specificity for bladder cancer (96% and 81-100%, respectively).[19, 20]

New urine tumor markers have shown potential for clinical utility in screening for bladder cancer and potentially even diagnosing or predicting recurrence, but their high cost and lower specificity place them in a limited role. Often they are used in combination with cytology to add diagnostic dimensions, but they have not replaced the need for cystoscopy.

The general preoperative medical condition of the patient and the possible presence of metastatic disease should be assessed.

Serum electrolytes help reveal any concomitant medical condition and assess renal function.

Blood reserves and bleeding risk can be determined by a complete blood count, prothrombin time, and activated partial thromboplastin time.

Presence of infection can be investigated with a white blood cell count, urinalysis, and culture.

Liver function tests and alkaline phosphatase may be suggestive of liver and bone metastases.

A baseline EKG can help identify underlying arrhythmias. For patients at high surgical risk, cardiac clearance may be warranted.


Imaging Studies

Routine studies performed for staging bladder cancer include chest radiography, intravenous pyelography (IVP), CT scan of the abdomen and pelvis, bone scan, and liver function tests. Mandatory preoperative imaging focuses on diagnosing and staging bladder cancer. Staging evaluation is a valuable tool to help determine the probability of extravesical disease.

Intravenous pyelography (IVP)

IVP enables evaluation of the collecting system of the kidneys, ureters, and bladder for any associated tumors for those patients with cystoscopic evidence of bladder cancer. Retrograde pyelography during cystoscopy can serve as an alternative to IVP.

Computed tomography (CT) urography

In recent years, CT urography has become a viable option to image the upper urinary tract. The sensitivity and specificity of CT scans surpass that of IVP. Furthermore, since many patients undergo CT scanning of the abdomen and pelvis for bladder cancer staging, the upper urinary tract can be evaluated in the same setting. CT urography has now become the test of choice for upper urinary tract evaluation in cancer.[21] Attention does need to be paid to the patient’s renal function, however. If intravenous contrast cannot be administered, retrograde pyelography can be used in combination with noncontrast axial imaging.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)

Gadolinium-enhanced and gadolinium-excreted MRI scans have also been used to image the renal pelvis and ureters. Whether MRI is as accurate as IVP or retrograde pyelography is currently under investigation.

MRI generally does not provide more information than a CT scan. If bone metastases are suspected, MRI is more sensitive for detection than a CT scan or a radionucleotide bone scan. In addition, recently published studies using ferumoxtran-10-enhanced MRI suggest that this modality may improve lymph node staging in patients with bladder cancer.


Ureteroscopy can help directly visualize and allow for biopsy of any suspicious lesion in the ureter or renal collecting system. However, ureteroscopy is invasive and is generally not performed without suspicion based on imaging studies.

Computed tomography

CT scanning of the abdomen and pelvis is more helpful in higher stage tumors to provide information regarding depth of tumor invasion, pelvic and paraortic lymphadenopathy, and the presence of liver or adrenal metastases. However, CT scans may fail to detect small nodal metastases in as many as 40% of patients. Liver metastases smaller than 2 cm in diameter are likewise difficult to detect. Also, CT scan is open to interpretation bias and can only estimate extravesical involvement.

CT scanning of the chest is the most sensitive test when evaluating for pulmonary metastases; however, many lesions smaller than 1 cm in diameter that may represent calcified granulomas are incidentally found. Plain radiography of the chest is less sensitive than CT for detection of metastases.

Bone scan

Bone scanning is not commonly performed in patients with normal alkaline phosphatase levels but may be performed as a baseline from which to compare future bone scans.

Positron emission tomography (PET)

Currently, PET scanning plays a limited role in the evaluation of bladder cancer. PET scanning has shown promise in detecting lymph node metastases or distant soft tissue metastases; however, because of the low urinary excretion of commonly used radioisotopes involved in PET scans, they are not yet helpful in the pelvic imaging of bladder cancer.


Diagnostic Procedures

Cystoscopy should be performed in all patients in whom bladder cancer is suggested.

Biopsy samples should be obtained from multiple sites (including the urethra) before partial cystectomy is considered.

Retrograde pyelography can be performed at the same time if findings from an IVP or CT urography are inconclusive to adequately evaluate the upper urinary tracts. With the advances in endoscopic equipment and fiberoptics, ureteroscopy has enabled direct visual inspection of any suspicious upper tract lesions, with the ability to obtain a biopsy specimen and even treat superficial lesions.

Selective saline wash cytologies or brush biopsies may be performed for further evaluation of the upper tract.

Transurethral resection with superficial and deep muscle biopsy is an important tool to evaluate the depth of invasion and tumor pathology. Bladder perforation and possible spillage of tumor cells outside of the bladder should be avoided. However, recent evidence suggests that, even with extraperitoneal or intraperitoneal perforation, the risk of extravesical tumor seeding is low.

Pelvic lymphadenectomy during cystectomy remains the most accurate way of identifying metastatic disease in the lymphatic system. Primary regions of lymphatic spread of bladder cancer include the perivesical, hypogastric, obturator, external iliac, and presacral nodes.


Histologic Findings

Primary solitary bladder cancer is a common indication for consideration of partial cystectomy. More than 90% of bladder cancers are urothelial carcinomas. Of these, 70% are papillary (see the image below), 10% are nodular, and 20% are mixed. When confined to the urothelium, the cancer is called carcinoma in situ. The other 10% of tumors are composed predominantly of squamous cell carcinomas (3-7%) and adenocarcinomas (2%). Secondary metastatic disease in the bladder accounts for less than 1% of all bladder cancers.

Papillary bladder tumors such as this one are typi Papillary bladder tumors such as this one are typically of low stage and grade (Ta-G1). Courtesy of Abbott and Vysis Inc.

Carcinoma in situ

Carcinoma in situ consists of poorly differentiated transitional cell carcinoma cells confined to the urothelium. Carcinoma in situ may be papillary or flat in architecture. These cells demonstrate poor intercellular cohesiveness; thus, urine cytopathology is a very sensitive test. Carcinoma in situ may be present in more than 25% of patients with high-grade superficial tumors and, thus, can exist concurrently with cancer found elsewhere in the bladder. When found, partial cystectomy is contraindicated.

Urothelial carcinoma (transitional cell carcinoma)

At a consensus conference, pathologists of the WHO and ISUP preferred the name urothelial carcinoma to describe tumors formerly known as transitional cell carcinoma.[22] Histopathology is used to grade bladder cancer tumors. Although no uniform grading system exists, most grading systems are based on the degree of anaplasia of the tumor cells. Tumor grade strongly correlates with stage and prognosis. The most commonly accepted system[22] is presented below.

  • Papilloma (former grade 0) - Fewer than 7 epithelial cell layers and no abnormalities in histology, these tumors are considered benign
  • Papillary urothelial tumors of unknown malignant potential (former grade I) - Well-differentiated thin fibrovascular stalks with a thickened urothelium that contain more than 7 cell layers and exhibit slight anaplasia and pleomorphism; possible increased nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratio and prominence of nuclear membrane; rare mitotic figures, some association with higher concurrent tumors
  • Low grade urothelial carcinoma (former grade II) - Moderately differentiated, wider fibrovascular core, greater cell disturbance with loss of cellular polarity, higher nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratio, nuclear pleomorphism and prominent nucleoli, and more frequent mitotic figures
  • High grade urothelial carcinoma (former grade III) - Poorly differentiated, marked pleomorphism, high nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratios, and frequent mitotic figures; cells that remain undifferentiated from basement membrane to surface

Squamous cell carcinoma

Histologically, squamous cell carcinomas are composed of keratinized islands that show various degrees of differentiation. Eccentric cellular aggregates known as squamous pearls also exist. Urinary cytopathology is less sensitive in detecting squamous cell carcinoma. Histologic tumor differentiation is less predictive of overall prognosis than it is for transitional cell carcinomas, although tumor stage shows a strong correlation with prognosis.


All histologic variants of enteric adenocarcinoma, including signet-ring and colloid variants, can be found in the bladder. Most adenocarcinomas are mucin-producing and are either papillary or solid in architecture. Signet-ring adenocarcinoma can produce linitis plastica of the bladder. Most adenocarcinomas are poorly differentiated and invasive upon presentation.



The American Joint Committee has designated staging based on the tumor, node, and metastases (TNM) classification.

  • The TNM system for the primary tumor (T) is as follows:
    • Stage TX - Primary tumor cannot be assessed
    • Stage T0 - No evidence of primary tumor
    • Stage Ta - Noninvasive papillary carcinoma
    • Stage Tis - Carcinoma in situ
    • Stage T1 - Invades subepithelial connective tissue
    • Stage T2a - Invades superficial muscle (inner half)
    • Stage T2b - Invades deep muscle (outer half)
    • Stage T3a - Microscopic invasion of perivesical tissue
    • Stage T3b - Macroscopic invasion of perivesical tissue
    • Stage T4a - Invades stroma of the prostate, uterus, and/or vagina
    • Stage T4b - Invades pelvic sidewall or abdominal wall
  • The following is the TNM system for the regional lymph nodes (N). Note that regional lymph nodes are in the pelvis; all others are considered distant lymph nodes.
    • Stage NX - Regional lymph nodes cannot be assessed
    • Stage N0 - No regional lymph node metastasis
    • Stage N1 - Metastasis to a single lymph node in the true pelvis
    • Stage N2 - Metastasis to 2 or more lymph nodes in the true pelvis
    • Stage N3 - Metastasis to lymph nodes that lie along the common iliac artery
  • The TNM system for distant metastasis (M) is as follows:
    • Stage MX - Distant metastasis cannot be assessed
    • Stage M0 - No distant metastasis
    • Stage M1 - Metastasis to distant lymph nodes, organs or tissues (i.e. bones. lungs or liver)

While overstaging is relatively uncommon, clinical understaging occurs in as many as 53% of patients.

Contributor Information and Disclosures

E Jason Abel, MD Assistant Professor of Urologic Oncology, Department of Urology, University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health; Attending Urologist, William S Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.


Tracy Downs, MD Associate Professor of Urology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health

Tracy Downs, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Surgeons, American Urological Association, Society of Urologic Oncology

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Aaron M Potretzke, MD Resident Physician, Department of Urology, University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics

Aaron M Potretzke, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Medical Association, Minnesota Medical Association

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Kelvin Wong, MD Resident Physician, Department of Urology, University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics

Kelvin Wong, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Surgeons, American Medical Association

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Jennifer E Heckman, MD, MPH Resident Physician, Department of Urology, University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics

Jennifer E Heckman, MD, MPH is a member of the following medical societies: American Urological Association, Endourological Society, Society of Women in Urology

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Specialty Editor Board

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Pharmacy; Editor-in-Chief, Medscape Drug Reference

Disclosure: Received salary from Medscape for employment. for: Medscape.

Chief Editor

Bradley Fields Schwartz, DO, FACS Professor of Urology, Director, Center for Laparoscopy and Endourology, Department of Surgery, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine

Bradley Fields Schwartz, DO, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Surgeons, Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons, Society of University Urologists, Association of Military Osteopathic Physicians and Surgeons, American Urological Association, Endourological Society

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Additional Contributors

Gamal Mostafa Ghoniem, MD, FACS Professor and Vice Chair of Urology, Chief, Division of Female Urology, Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery, and Voiding Dysfunction, Department of Urology, University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine

Gamal Mostafa Ghoniem, MD, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: American Urogynecologic Society, International Continence Society, International Urogynaecology Association, Society of Urodynamics, Female Pelvic Medicine and Urogenital Reconstruction, American College of Surgeons, American Urological Association

Disclosure: Received honoraria from Astellas for speaking and teaching; Received grant/research funds from Uroplasty for none; Partner received honoraria from Allergan for speaking and teaching.


The authors and editors of Medscape Reference gratefully acknowledge the contributions of previous authors Martin I Resnick, MD; Jason T Jankowski, MD; Edward E Cherullo, MD; Matthew L Steinway, MD; and Adrian H Feng, MD, to the development and writing of this article.

  1. Nieh PT and Marshall FF. Surgery of Bladder Cancer. Campbell-Walsh Urology. ninth. 2007. 2503-2505.

  2. Lindahl F, Jørgensen D, Egvad K. Partial cystectomy for transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1984. 18(2):125-9. [Medline].

  3. Given RW, Wajsman Z:. Bladder sparing treatments for muscle-invasive transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. AUA Update Series. 1997. 16:41-48.

  4. Chiou HY, Chiou ST, Hsu YH, Chou YL, Tseng CH, Wei ML, et al. Incidence of transitional cell carcinoma and arsenic in drinking water: a follow-up study of 8,102 residents in an arseniasis-endemic area in northeastern Taiwan. Am J Epidemiol. 2001 Mar 1. 153(5):411-8. [Medline].

  5. Smith AH, Goycolea M, Haque R, Biggs ML. Marked increase in bladder and lung cancer mortality in a region of Northern Chile due to arsenic in drinking water. Am J Epidemiol. 1998 Apr 1. 147(7):660-9. [Medline].

  6. Smith AH, Hopenhayn-Rich C, Bates MN, Goeden HM, Hertz-Picciotto I, Duggan HM, et al. Cancer risks from arsenic in drinking water. Environ Health Perspect. 1992 Jul. 97:259-67. [Medline].

  7. Sweeney P, Kursh ED, Resnick MI. Partial cystectomy. Urol Clin North Am. 1992 Nov. 19(4):701-11. [Medline].

  8. Golijanin D, Yossepowitch O, Beck SD, Sogani P, Dalbagni G. Carcinoma in a bladder diverticulum: presentation and treatment outcome. J Urol. 2003 Nov. 170(5):1761-4. [Medline].

  9. Serretta V, Pomara G, Piazza F, Gange E. Pure squamous cell carcinoma of the bladder in western countries. Report on 19 consecutive cases. Eur Urol. 2000 Jan. 37(1):85-9. [Medline].

  10. Dandekar NP, Dalal AV, Tongaonkar HB, Kamat MR. Adenocarcinoma of bladder. Eur J Surg Oncol. 1997 Apr. 23(2):157-60. [Medline].

  11. Herr HW. Urachal carcinoma: the case for extended partial cystectomy. J Urol. 1994 Feb. 151(2):365-6. [Medline].

  12. Hays DM, Raney RB, Wharam MD, Wiener E, Lobe TE, Andrassy RJ, et al. Children with vesical rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) treated by partial cystectomy with neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy, with or without radiotherapy. A report from the Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study (IRS) Committee. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 1995 Feb. 17(1):46-52. [Medline].

  13. Beilan J, Lawton A, Hajdenberg J, Rosser CJ. Pheochromocytoma of the urinary bladder: a systematic review of the contemporary literature. BMC Urol. 2013 Apr 29. 13(1):22. [Medline].

  14. Xu YF, Wang GC, Zheng JH, Peng B. Partial cystectomy: Is it a reliable option for the treatment of bladder leiomyosarcoma?. Can Urol Assoc J. 2011 Feb. 5(1):E11-3. [Medline].

  15. Balbay MD, Slaton JW, Trane N, Skibber J, Dinney CP. Rationale for bladder-sparing surgery in patients with locally advanced colorectal carcinoma. Cancer. 1999 Dec 1. 86(11):2212-6. [Medline].

  16. Nyam DC, Seow-Choen F, Ho MS, Goh HS. Bladder involvement in patients with colorectal carcinoma. Singapore Med J. 1995 Oct. 36(5):525-6. [Medline].

  17. Tai HC, Chung SD, Wang SM, Chueh SC, Yu HJ. Laparoscopic partial cystectomy for various bladder pathologies. BJU Int. 2007 Aug. 100(2):382-5. [Medline].

  18. Ikeda M, Endo F, Shiga Y, Oguchi T, Yashi M, Hattori K. [Cystoscopy-assisted partial cystectomy for paraganglioma of the urinary bladder]. Hinyokika Kiyo. 2008 Sep. 54(9):611-4. [Medline].

  19. Budman LI, Kassouf W, Steinberg JR. Biomarkers for detection and surveillance of bladder cancer. Can Urol Assoc J. 2008 Jun. 2(3):212-21. [Medline].

  20. Shirodkar SP, Lokeshwar VB. Bladder tumor markers: from hematuria to molecular diagnostics--where do we stand?. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2008 Jul. 8(7):1111-23. [Medline].

  21. Wang LJ, Wong YC, Huang CC, Wu CH, Hung SC, Chen HW. Multidetector computerized tomography urography is more accurate than excretory urography for diagnosing transitional cell carcinoma of the upper urinary tract in adults with hematuria. J Urol. 2010 Jan. 183(1):48-55. [Medline].

  22. Epstein JI, Amin MB, Reuter VR, Mostofi FK. The World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology consensus classification of urothelial (transitional cell) neoplasms of the urinary bladder. Bladder Consensus Conference Committee. Am J Surg Pathol. 1998 Dec. 22(12):1435-48. [Medline].

  23. Fedeli U, Fedewa SA, Ward EM. Treatment of muscle invasive bladder cancer: evidence from the National Cancer Database, 2003 to 2007. J Urol. 2011 Jan. 185(1):72-8. [Medline].

  24. Kim HL, Steinberg GD. The current status of bladder preservation in the treatment of muscle invasive bladder cancer. J Urol. 2000 Sep. 164(3 Pt 1):627-32. [Medline].

  25. Herr HW. Editorial comment on: Bladder preservation in selected patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer by complete transurethral resection of the bladder plus systemic chemotherapy: long-term follow-up of a phase 2 nonrandomized comparative trial with radical cystectomy. Eur Urol. 2009 Apr. 55(4):920-1. [Medline].

  26. Dorin RP, Skinner EC. Extended lymphadenectomy in bladder cancer. Curr Opin Urol. 2010 Sep. 20(5):414-20. [Medline].

  27. Colombo JR Jr, Desai M, Canes D, Frota R, Haber GP, Moinzadeh A, et al. Laparoscopic partial cystectomy for urachal and bladder cancer. Clinics. December 2008. 63:731-4. [Medline].

  28. Tareen BU, Mufarrij PW, Godoy G, Stifelman MD. Robot-assisted laparoscopic partial cystectomy and diverticulectomy: initial experience of four cases. J Endourol. 2008 Jul. 22(7):1497-500. [Medline].

  29. Spiess PE, Correa JJ. Robotic assisted laparoscopic partial cystectomy and urachal resection for urachal adenocarcinoma. Int Braz J Urol. 2009 Sep-Oct. 35(5):609. [Medline].

  30. Allaparthi S, Ramanathan R, Balaji KC. Robotic partial cystectomy for bladder cancer: a single-institutional pilot study. J Endourol. 2010 Feb. 24(2):223-7. [Medline].

  31. Kates M, Gorin MA, Deibert CM, Pierorazio PM, Schoenberg MP, McKiernan JM, et al. In-hospital death and hospital-acquired complications among patients undergoing partial cystectomy for bladder cancer in the United States. Urol Oncol. 2014 Jan. 32(1):53.e9-14. [Medline].

  32. Peress JA, Waterhouse K, Cole AT. Complications of partial cystectomy in patients with high grade bladder carcinoma. J Urol. 1977 Nov. 118(5):761. [Medline].

  33. Smaldone MC, Jacobs BL, Smaldone AM, Hrebinko RL Jr. Long-term results of selective partial cystectomy for invasive urothelial bladder carcinoma. Urology. September 2008. 72:613-6. [Medline].

  34. Resnick MI, O'Conor VJ Jr. Segmental resection for carcinoma of the bladder: review of 102 patients. J Urol. 1973 Jun. 109(6):1007-10. [Medline].

  35. Faysal MH, Freiha FS. Evaluation of partial cystectomy for carcinoma of bladder. Urology. 1979 Oct. 14(4):352-6. [Medline].

  36. Bruins HM, Wopat R, Mitra AP, Cai J, Miranda G, Skinner EC, et al. Long-term outcomes of salvage radical cystectomy for recurrent urothelial carcinoma of the bladder following partial cystectomy. BJU Int. 2013 Mar. 111(3 Pt B):E37-42. [Medline].

  37. Fahmy N, Aprikian A, Tanguay S, Mahmud SM, Al-Otaibi M, Jeyaganth S. Practice patterns and recurrence after partial cystectomy for bladder cancer. World J Urol. 2010 Aug. 28(4):419-23. [Medline].

  38. Kassouf W, Swanson D, Kamat AM, Leibovici D, Siefker-Radtke A, Munsell MF, et al. Partial cystectomy for muscle invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: a contemporary review of the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. J Urol. 2006 Jun. 175(6):2058-62. [Medline].

  39. Knoedler JJ, Boorjian SA, Kim SP, Weight CJ, Thapa P, Tarrell RF, et al. Does partial cystectomy compromise oncologic outcomes for patients with bladder cancer compared to radical cystectomy? A matched case-control analysis. J Urol. 2012 Oct. 188(4):1115-9. [Medline].

  40. Grossman HB, Natale RB, Tangen CM, Speights VO, Vogelzang NJ, Trump DL. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus cystectomy compared with cystectomy alone for locally advanced bladder cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003 Aug 28. 349(9):859-66. [Medline].

  41. Millikan R, Dinney C, Swanson D, Sweeney P, Ro JY, Smith TL. Integrated therapy for locally advanced bladder cancer: final report of a randomized trial of cystectomy plus adjuvant M-VAC versus cystectomy with both preoperative and postoperative M-VAC. J Clin Oncol. 2001 Oct 15. 19(20):4005-13. [Medline].

  42. Chung SD, Tai HC, Chueh SC. Laparoscopic partial cystectomy for a vesical leiomyoma. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. May 2007. 18:565-6. [Medline].

  43. Chung SD, Tai HC, Chueh SC. Laparoscopic partial cystectomy for a vesical leiomyoma. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2007 May. 18(5):565-6. [Medline].

  44. Duncan RE, Bennett DW, Evans AT, Aron BS, Schellhas HF. Radiation-induced bladder tumors. J Urol. 1977 Jul. 118(1 Pt 1):43-5. [Medline].

  45. Greene FL. Urinary Bladder. American Joint Committee on Cancer: AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 6th ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2002. 335-40.

  46. Herr HW. Editorial comment on: Bladder preservation in selected patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer by complete transurethral resection of the bladder plus systemic chemotherapy: long-term follow-up of a phase 2 nonrandomized comparative trial with radical cystectomy. Eur Urol. 2009 Apr. 55(4):920-1. [Medline].

  47. Hinman F. Atlas of Urologic Surgery. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders; 1998. 500-4.

  48. Holzbeierlein JM, Lopez-Corona E, Bochner BH, Herr HW, Donat SM, Russo P, et al. Partial cystectomy: a contemporary review of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center experience and recommendations for patient selection. J Urol. 2004 Sep. 172(3):878-81. [Medline].

  49. Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, Garshell J, Neyman N, Altekruse SF, et al. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2010, National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD. Available at

  50. Ikeda M, Endo F, Shiga Y, Oguchi T, Yashi M, Hattori K, et al. Cystoscopy-assisted partial cystectomy for paraganglioma of the urinary bladder. Hinyokika Kiyo. September 2008. 54:611-4. [Medline].

  51. Inoue T, Kinoshita H, Satou M, Oguchi N, Kawa G, Muguruma K, et al. Complications of urologic laparoscopic surgery: a single institute experience of 1017 procedures. J Endourol. 2010 Feb. 24(2):253-60. [Medline].

  52. Jardin A, Vallencien G. Partial cystectomy for bladder tumors. Kuss R, Khoury S, Denis LJ, et al, eds. Bladder cancer, Part A: Pathology, Diagnosis and Surgery. New York, NY: AR Liss; 1984. 375.

  53. Lang EK, Thomas R, Davis R, Myers L, Sabel A, Macchia R, et al. Multiphasic helical computerized tomography for the assessment of microscopic hematuria: a prospective study. J Urol. 2004 Jan. 171(1):237-43. [Medline].

  54. Messing EM, Catalona W. Urothelial tumors of the urinary tract. Walsh PC, Retik AB, Vaughan ED, Wein AJ, eds. Campbell's Urology. 7th ed. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders; 1998. 2329-71.

  55. Soloway MS. Commentary. Hinman F, ed. Atlas of Urologic Surgery. Atlas of Urologic Surgery. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co; 1998. 504.

  56. Solsona E, Iborra I, Collado A, Rubio-Briones J, Casanova J, Calatrava A. Feasibility of radical transurethral resection as monotherapy for selected patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer. J Urol. 2010 Aug. 184(2):475-80. [Medline].

  57. Tai HC, Chung SD, Wang SM, Chueh SC, Yu HJ. Laparoscopic partial cystectomy for various bladder pathologies. BJU Int. December 2007. 100:382-5. [Medline].

Papillary bladder tumors such as this one are typically of low stage and grade (Ta-G1). Courtesy of Abbott and Vysis Inc.
Gross anatomy of the bladder.
Table 1. Proportion of Patients With Bladder Cancer Treated With Partial Cystectomy
Source Total Patients With Bladder Cancer Patients Treated With Partial Cystectomy (%)
Utz et al (1973) 3454 199 (5.8)
Brannan et al (1978) 551 49 (7.1)
Faysal and Freiha (1979) 859 117 (13.6)
Merrell et al (1979) 585 54 (9.2)
Ojeda and Johnson (1983) 397 23 (5.8)
Jardin and Vallencien (1984) 475 90 (18.9)
Hayter et al (2000) 20,822 729 (3.5)
Holzbeierlein et al (2004) 935 58 (6.2)
Table 2. Options Other than Partial Cystectomy
Study Number of Patients Induction Therapy % Complete Response Consolidation Therapy % Overall Survival (years) % Overall Survival with Bladder Intact (years)
Housset et al 120 Bifractionated XRT + concurrent cisplatin + 5-fluorouracil 77 Bifractionated XRT + concurrent 5-fluorouracil + cisplatin 63 (5)  


Sauer et al 184 45-54 Gy XRT + concurrent cisplatin or carboplatin 80 None 56 (5) 41 (5)
Fellin et al 56 2 cycles MCVa, 40 Gy XRT + concurrent cisplatin 50 24 Gy XRT + concurrent cisplatin 55 (5) 41 (5)
Tester et al 49 40 Gy XRT + concurrent cisplatin 66 24 Gy XRT + concurrent cisplatin 60 (4) 42 (4)
Tester et al 91 2 cycles MCV, 39.6 Gy XRT + concurrent cisplatin 75 25.2 Gy XRT + concurrent cisplatin 62 (4) 44 (4)
Shipley et al 61 2 cycles MCVa, 39.6 Gy XRT + concurrent cisplatin 61 25.2 Gy XRT + concurrent cisplatin 48 (5) 36 (5)
Shipley et al 62 39.6 Gy XRT + concurrent cisplatin 55 25.2 Gy XRT + concurrent cisplatin 49 (5) 40 (5)
Kachnic et al 106 2 cycles MCV, 40 Gy XRT + concurrent cisplatin 66 24.8 Gy XRT + concurrent cisplatin 52 (5) 43 (5)
Zietman et al 18 Bifractionated XRT + concurrent cisplatin + 5-fluorouracil 78 Bifractionated XRT + concurrent cisplatin + 5-fluorouracil + 3 cycles MCV 83 (3) 78 (3)
Table 3. Various Studies and Their Corresponding Recurrence Rates
Studies Recurrence rates
Resnick and O'Connor (1973) 76%
Evans and Texter (1975) 40%
Novick and Stewart (1976) 50%
Peress et al (1977) 54%
Cummings et al (1978) 49%
Schoborg et al (1979) 70%
Faysal and Freiha (1979) 78%
Jardin and Vallencien (1984) 78%
Lindahl et al (1984) 58%
Kaneti (1986) 38%
Dandekar et al (1995) 43%
Holzbeierlein et al (2004) 19%
Kassouf et al (2006) 49%
Knoedler et al (2012) 43%
Table 4. Survival Rates by Tumor Grade
Source Five-year Survival (%) Ten-year Survival (%)
Grade I Grade II Grade III/IV Grade I Grade II Grade III/IV
Magri (1962)  


33 34 - - -
Utz et al (1973) 100 48 39 - - -
Novick and Stewart (1976) 100 75 40 0 67 8
Brannan et al (1978) 50 62 55 50 33 30
Cummings et al (1978) 100 96 32 - - -
Schoborg et al (1979) 75 62 26 50 28 4
Faysal and Freiha (1979) 100 53 30 25 20 8
Merrell et al (1979) 78 56 22 83 32 0
Kaneti (1986) 75 46 46 - - -
Dandekar et al (1995) 100 94.4 53.5 - - -
Table 5. Survival Rates by Tumor Stage
Source Five-year Survival (%) Ten-year Survival (%)
T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 Overall T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 Overall
Magri (1962) - 80 38 26 0 42 - - - - - -
Long et al (1962) 80 67 43 9 0 - - - - - - -
Cox et al (1969) - - 20 16 - - - - - - - -
Resnick and O'Connor (1978) 75 71 77 12.5 20 35 - - - - - -
Utz et al (1973) - 68 47 29 0 39 - - - - - -
Evans and Texter (1975) - 69 43 14 0 0 - - - - - 21
Novick and Stewart (1976) - 67 53 20 - 46 - 67 44 - - 36
Brannan et al (1978) 100 69 54 33 0 57 - 31 36 11 - 32
Cummings et al (1978) - 79 80 6 - 60 - - - - - -
Schoborg et al (1979) 69 69 29 12 100 43 - 37 0 0 0 12
Faysal and Freiha (1979) 75 58 29 7 0 40 21 15 13 7 0 9
Merrell et al (1979) 100 100 67 25 - 48 - 100 33 0 0 32
Lindahl et al (1984) - 59 38 - - 42 - 48 25 - 0 38
Kaneti (1986) - 68 40 33 0 48 - - - - - -
Smaldone et al (2008) - - - - - 70            
a Stage T3a/T3b
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2016 by WebMD LLC. This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.