Urology · 2018
Bladder Re-augmentation in Classic Bladder Exstrophy: Risk Factors and Prevention.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Benz Karl S, Jayman John, Doersch Karen, Maruf Mahir, Baumgartner Timothy, Kasprenski Matthew, Gearhart John P
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To characterize the causes of re-augmentation in patients with classic bladder exstrophy (CBE).
METHODS: A prospectively maintained institutional database of 1327 exstrophy-epispadias complex patients was reviewed for patients with CBE who underwent more than 1 augmentation cystoplasty (AC) procedure. Data regarding bladder capacities, complications following AC, and reasons for re-augmentation were evaluated.
RESULTS: A total of 166 patients with CBE underwent AC. Of these, 67 (40.4%) were included in the control group and 17 (10%) patients underwent a re-augmentation. There were several indications for re-augmentation including continued small bladder capacity (17 of 17), inadequate bladder necks (8 of 17), failed rattail augmentation (2 of 17), stomal incontinence (1 of 17), a urethrocutaneous fistula (1 of 17), and an hourglass augmentation (1 of 17). Of note, 5 of the 17 patients (29%) had a re-augmentation procedure with a ureteral reimplantation. The sigmoid colon was the most commonly used bowel segment in the failed initial AC (8 patients), whereas the ileum was the most commonly used segment during re-augmentation (12 patients). In the re-augmentation cohort, the mean amount of bowel used during the first AC procedure was 12 cm (standard deviation [SD] 3.6) compared with 19 cm (SD 5.0) during re-augmentation. The mean amount of bowel used for control group augmentations was 20.8 cm (SD 4). The mean re-augmentation preoperative bladder capacity of 100 mL (SD 60) immediately increased after re-augmentation to 180.8 mL (SD 56.4) (P = .0001).
CONCLUSION: Bladder re-augmentation is most commonly required in the setting of a small bladder capacity after an initial AC, when an insufficient amount of bowel is used during the first AC procedure.
METHODS: A prospectively maintained institutional database of 1327 exstrophy-epispadias complex patients was reviewed for patients with CBE who underwent more than 1 augmentation cystoplasty (AC) procedure. Data regarding bladder capacities, complications following AC, and reasons for re-augmentation were evaluated.
RESULTS: A total of 166 patients with CBE underwent AC. Of these, 67 (40.4%) were included in the control group and 17 (10%) patients underwent a re-augmentation. There were several indications for re-augmentation including continued small bladder capacity (17 of 17), inadequate bladder necks (8 of 17), failed rattail augmentation (2 of 17), stomal incontinence (1 of 17), a urethrocutaneous fistula (1 of 17), and an hourglass augmentation (1 of 17). Of note, 5 of the 17 patients (29%) had a re-augmentation procedure with a ureteral reimplantation. The sigmoid colon was the most commonly used bowel segment in the failed initial AC (8 patients), whereas the ileum was the most commonly used segment during re-augmentation (12 patients). In the re-augmentation cohort, the mean amount of bowel used during the first AC procedure was 12 cm (standard deviation [SD] 3.6) compared with 19 cm (SD 5.0) during re-augmentation. The mean amount of bowel used for control group augmentations was 20.8 cm (SD 4). The mean re-augmentation preoperative bladder capacity of 100 mL (SD 60) immediately increased after re-augmentation to 180.8 mL (SD 56.4) (P = .0001).
CONCLUSION: Bladder re-augmentation is most commonly required in the setting of a small bladder capacity after an initial AC, when an insufficient amount of bowel is used during the first AC procedure.