Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Treatment options for urinary blockages from cancer in cats
By Covo, Mariel S et al.·Published in Journal of feline medicine and surgery·2024·Department of Internal Medicine, United States·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Use of the subcutaneous ureteral bypass device and urethral stenting for treatment of malignant urinary outflow tract obstructions in cats.
- Species:
- cat
Plain-English summary
A group of 14 cats with urinary blockages caused by cancer were treated using special devices to relieve the pressure in their urinary tracts. The devices included a subcutaneous ureteral bypass (SUB) and self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS). While some cats experienced re-blockages after the stents were placed, those with the SUB device did not have this issue. The average survival time after treatment varied, with some cats living significantly longer when receiving additional therapies. Overall, these devices provided a way to relieve painful obstructions and improve the cats' quality of life.
People also search for: cat urinary blockage treatment · feline cancer urinary obstruction · cat stent for urinary problems
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to describe the technical success and outcomes of ureteral and urethral decompression using the subcutaneous ureteral bypass (SUB) device and transurethral self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) as a palliative treatment option for feline malignant urinary outflow tract obstructions. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted of 14 cats with ureteral and/or urethral obstructions secondary to diagnosed or suspected transitional cell carcinoma (TCC). In all cats, a SUB device and/or a SEMS was placed to relieve the obstruction(s). Group 1 consisted of cats with ureteral obstructions, with or without concurrent urethral obstructions, and group 2 consisted of cats with only urethral obstructions. RESULTS: Eight cats were included in group 1 (seven with concurrent urethral obstructions) and six cats were included in group 2. TCC was confirmed in 8/14 cats. Repeat urethral obstruction due to tumor in growth occurred in 6/13 (46%) cats with a SEMS, and no cats developed recurrent ureteral obstructions after placement of the SUB device. Three cats had additional covered stents placed after urethral re-obstruction. The median survival time (MST) from the time of device placement was 52 days in group 1 (mean 92; range 14-349) and 80 days in group 2 (mean 96; range 7-209). The MST from the time of mass identification of the cats that did and did not receive adjunctive therapy was 349 days (mean 358; range 124-602) and 43 days (mean 113; range 14-423), respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The use of bypass devices for feline malignant urinary outflow tract obstructions is a viable option to provide immediate renal and urinary bladder decompression. TCC in cats is locally aggressive and can result in urethral re-obstruction, prompting consideration for placing a covered urethral stent. The use of adjunctive therapies for malignant neoplasia should be considered to improve overall survival once the obstruction has been relieved.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39344788/