The Journal of urology · 1995
Urinary diversion in bladder exstrophy and incontinent epispadias: 25 years of experience.
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.
Stein R, Fisch M, Stöckle M, Hohenfellner R
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To determine the optimal surgical approach in achieving complete urinary continence with preservation of the upper urinary tract in the exstrophy-epispadias complex we reviewed the records of patients treated at our institution.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1968 to July 1994, 115 patients with bladder exstrophy/incontinent epispadias were treated of whom followup was available for 104 and 2 died of causes unrelated to urinary diversion. Mean followup is 16.7 years. In 43 of the 102 patients surgery was primarily performed at our institution (urinary diversion in 39, a modified Young-Dees procedure in 1 and sling plasty in 3). In another 59 patients urinary diversion was done secondarily after therapy elsewhere (bladder closure/bladder neck reconstruction in 34 and failed urinary diversion with incontinence in 22). Urinary diversion was performed in 49 patients, a Young-Dees procedure in 7 and genital reconstruction alone in 3.
RESULTS: The present continence rates are 96% for the rectal reservoir, 97% for the Mainz pouch I and 67% for the modified Young-Dees augmentation. Upper tracts have remained stable and no bowel neoplasms have developed.
CONCLUSIONS: Rectal reservoirs represent our urinary diversion of choice. After failed reconstruction/insufficient anal sphincter a Mainz pouch I is constructed and when the upper tract has deteriorated a colon conduit is created.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1968 to July 1994, 115 patients with bladder exstrophy/incontinent epispadias were treated of whom followup was available for 104 and 2 died of causes unrelated to urinary diversion. Mean followup is 16.7 years. In 43 of the 102 patients surgery was primarily performed at our institution (urinary diversion in 39, a modified Young-Dees procedure in 1 and sling plasty in 3). In another 59 patients urinary diversion was done secondarily after therapy elsewhere (bladder closure/bladder neck reconstruction in 34 and failed urinary diversion with incontinence in 22). Urinary diversion was performed in 49 patients, a Young-Dees procedure in 7 and genital reconstruction alone in 3.
RESULTS: The present continence rates are 96% for the rectal reservoir, 97% for the Mainz pouch I and 67% for the modified Young-Dees augmentation. Upper tracts have remained stable and no bowel neoplasms have developed.
CONCLUSIONS: Rectal reservoirs represent our urinary diversion of choice. After failed reconstruction/insufficient anal sphincter a Mainz pouch I is constructed and when the upper tract has deteriorated a colon conduit is created.