DOI 10.1080/003655999750015925
Urological situation five years after spinal cord injury.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate bladder emptying methods and urinary tract problems five years after spinal cord injury (SCI).
MATERIAL AND
METHODS
Neurological level, method of bladder emptying and urological investigations were retrieved from the records for all 165 patients admitted to our Centre for Spinal Cord Injured with a traumatic SCI sustained from 1984 to 1988.
RESULTS
A total of 77 patients with completed 5-year control were included in the final analyses. We found that 64% had suprasacral bladder dysfunction, while 23% had infrasacral bladder dysfunction. Plasma-creatinine was normal, both at the initial examination and the 5-year control. From the time in the SCI centre to the 5-year control a trend towards less intermittent catheterization and more use of abdominal pressure was observed. During the follow-up period nine patients (12%) experienced urinary calculi. Six bladder- stones were removed endoscopically. Five had kidney stones; three were left untreated, one was removed by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and one by open surgery. Four patients (5%) had renograms with functional distribution outside the limits 40-60%. Three patients had bladder neck incision performed, one had a sacral anterior root stimulator implanted and one had a continent Kock reservoir. No sphincterotomies were performed. Fifty-one had received medicine to facilitate bladder emptying. Eighty-one percent had been treated for at least one urinary tract infection (UTI), 22% had 2-3 UTI/year, and 12% 4 or more UTI/year. Twelve percent had been on prophylactic low-dose antibiotics.
CONCLUSION
The final outcome regarding urological complications is satisfactory even with our conservative handling of the SCI individuals.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
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.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.