4.2 Article

Augmentation colocystoplasty in bladder exstrophy

期刊

PEDIATRIC SURGERY INTERNATIONAL
卷 18, 期 1, 页码 43-49

出版社

SPRINGER-VERLAG
DOI: 10.1007/s003830200010

关键词

bladder exstrophy; bladder augmentation; colocystoplasty; bladder compliance; incontinence

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A good bladder capacity and adequate outlet resistance determine success after staged reconstruction of bladder exstrophy (BE). Augmentation cystoplasty (AC) is an established salvage procedure to treat the small, noncompliant bladders of some of these children. In a series of 89 patients with BE treated over the last 12 years, 19 underwent detubularized augmentation colo-cystoplasty (ACC) as an adjunctive procedure. Nine underwent ACC at the time of bladder-neck reconstruction (BNR) for small bladder capacity and poor compliance; 10 underwent ACC as a secondary procedure after BNR for persistent urinary incontinence or poor bladder compliance and upper-tract deterioration. The follow-up period ranged between 6 months and 122 years (mean 41 months). Complications included symptomatic urinary-tract infection in 4 patients, recurrent epididymo-orchitis in 2, calculi in 3, colonic anastomotic dehiscence in 1, bladder-patch fistula in 2, and secondary coloureteric-junction obstruction in 1. There was no postoperative reservoir perforation or mortality. The upper tract remained normal or stable in all patients. Nine of the 19 patients are dry both day and night; 4 others are dry during the day but have occasional nocturnal wetting. Three patients have nocturnal wetting with stress incontinence and 2 remain incontinent. Seven patients can void effectively using abdominal contractions and 12 require clean intermittent catherization to ensure complete voiding. The indications and results of AC in BE from other series are reviewed. AC is an important and safe adjunctive procedure in a subset of BE patients with small and poorly compliant bladders. Despite the complications, more liberal use of AC in BE is warranted.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据