Literature DB >> 11371958

Should we treat vesicoureteral reflux in patients who simultaneously undergo bladder augmentation for neuropathic bladder?

P López Pereira1, M J Martinez Urrutia, R Lobato Romera, E Jaureguizar.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: If high pressure is responsible for vesicoureteral reflux in neurogenic bladders, eliminating the high pressure should resolve reflux in noncompliant bladders. Nevertheless, the need for simultaneous ureteral reimplantation and bladder augmentation remains controversial in patients with a noncompliant bladder and vesicoureteral reflux.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Bladder augmentation was performed in 8 boys and 8 girls with a noncompliant bladder and vesicoureteral reflux at a mean age of 10 years (range 2 to 17) because they had not responded satisfactorily to clean intermittent catheterization and anticholinergic therapy alone. No effort had been made to correct reflux surgically in these patients. Before bladder augmentation reflux was grade II to III in 4 ureters (3 patients) and IV to V in 18 (13). The bladder was augmented with intestine in 14 patients and with ureter in 2. Mean followup was 5.2 years (range 2.8 to 7.5).
RESULTS: After bladder augmentation bladder compliance improved in all patients. Of the 18 ureters with high grade reflux 2 were used for bladder augmentation, and reflux resolved in 13, was downgraded in 1 and persisted in 2. Of the 4 ureters with low grade reflux, reflux disappeared in 2 and was down graded in 2. The rate of high and low grade vesicoureteral reflux resolution or improvement was 87.5% and 100%, respectively. At the end of the study only 3 patients had persistent reflux, which was downgraded in 2. No urinary tract infections developed in any patient and none was receiving chemoprophylaxis 6 months postoperatively.
CONCLUSIONS: Our experience indicates that antireflux procedures are not routinely needed in patients with a noncompliant bladder and associated vesicoureteral reflux who undergo bladder augmentation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11371958     DOI: 10.1097/00005392-200106001-00011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  6 in total

1.  The use of refluxing ureter in the creation of a Mitrofanoff channel in children undergoing bladder augmentation: is a formal reimplantation necessary?

Authors:  Parag Tapre; Sudipta Sen; Jacob Chacko; Sampath Karl
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2005-11-25       Impact factor: 1.827

2.  Should simultaneous ureteral reimplantation be performed during sigmoid bladder augmentation to reduce vesicoureteral reflux in neurogenic bladder cases?

Authors:  Peng Zhang; Yong Yang; Zhi-jin Wu; Ning Zhang; Chao-hua Zhang; Xiao-dong Zhang
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 3.  Management of vesicoureteral reflux in neurogenic bladder.

Authors:  Charlotte Q Wu; Israel Franco
Journal:  Investig Clin Urol       Date:  2017-06-02

4.  An Unusual Case of Syringohydromyelia Presenting with Neurogenic Bladder.

Authors:  Antonella Geljic; Slaven Abdovic; Fran Stampalija; Lana Loncar; Batos A Tripalo; Martin Cuk
Journal:  European J Pediatr Surg Rep       Date:  2019-11-22

5.  Ureteral reimplantation during augmentation cystoplasty is not needed for vesicoureteral reflux in patients with neurogenic bladder: a long-term retrospective study.

Authors:  Hiroki Chiba; Takeya Kitta; Madoka Higuchi; Naohisa Kusakabe; Masafumi Kon; Michiko Nakamura; Nobuo Shinohara
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2022-03-29       Impact factor: 2.264

6.  The Effects of Intradetrusor BoNT-A Injections on Vesicoureteral Reflux in Children With Myelodysplasia.

Authors:  Tuncay Toprak; Yavuz Onur Danacioglu; Ayhan Verit
Journal:  Int Neurourol J       Date:  2019-12-31       Impact factor: 2.835

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.