Literature DB >> 15008735

Preventing reservoir calculi after augmentation cystoplasty and continent urinary diversion: the influence of an irrigation protocol.

T W Hensle1, J Bingham, J Lam, A Shabsigh.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the influence of an irrigation protocol in preventing reservoir calculi forming after augmentation cystoplasty and continent urinary diversion. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1985 and 1995, 91 patients had an augmentation cystoplasty and/or continent urinary diversion (group 1; 54 females and 37 males, mean age 11.1 years, range 1-31); these patients were not routinely instructed to use irrigation after surgery. The segments used included ileum (44), colon (36), stomach (eight) and ureter (three). Between 1995 and 2000, 42 patients (group 2) underwent urinary reconstruction (22 females and 20 males, mean age 14.8 years, range 4-27), the segment used being ileum (30), colon (five), ureter (five) and stomach (two) but in contrast to group 1 they then were placed on a standard prophylactic irrigation protocol. The occurrence of stones in the reservoir was then assessed.
RESULTS: Thirty-nine of the 91 patients (42.8%) in group 1 presented with reservoir calculi after reconstruction and 22 had several episodes. The mean time to presentation was 30 months. The incidence of stone formation by underlying diagnosis included: myelomeningocele, 32/48 (66%), exstrophy five/25 (25%), posterior urethral valves two/20 (10%) and rhabdomyosarcoma, none of three. Fifty of the 91 patients had an abdominal stoma, with stone formation in 33 (66%), while 41 used the native urethra, with stone formation in six (15%). Three (7%) of the 42 patients in group 2 developed reservoir calculi after reconstruction, two in patients with myelomeningocele and one in a trauma patient who had residual bone spicules in the bladder; the mean time to presentation was 26.5 months.
CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that the irrigation protocol used in group 2 significantly reduced the number of reservoir calculi after urinary tract reconstruction when bowel was used as part of the reconstruction (43% vs. 7%). The most calculi in both groups were in immobile patients with sensory impairment. Also, patients with an abdominal stoma had a greater risk of reservoir calculi (66%) than those using the native urethra (15%).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15008735     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410x.2003.04664.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  15 in total

1.  CUA Guideline: Management of ureteral calculi.

Authors:  Michael Ordon; Sero Andonian; Brian Blew; Trevor Schuler; Ben Chew; Kenneth T Pace
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2015-12-14       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 2.  Current approaches to the urologic care of children with spina bifida.

Authors:  David B Joseph
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 3.092

3.  Cumulative incidence of outcomes and urologic procedures after augmentation cystoplasty.

Authors:  Bruce J Schlomer; Hillary L Copp
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2014-04-13       Impact factor: 1.830

Review 4.  Contemporary issues relating to transitional care in bladder exstrophy.

Authors:  Fardod O'kelly; Daniel Keefe; Sender Herschorn; Armando J Lorenzo
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 1.862

5.  Efficacy of bladder irrigation and surveillance program in prevention of urinary tract infections and bladder calculi in children with an ileocystoplasty and bladder neck repair.

Authors:  Marleen van den Heijkant; Nadeem Haider; Craig Taylor; Ramnath Subramaniam
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2011-05-08       Impact factor: 1.827

6.  Urolithiasis in adult spina bifida patients: study in 260 patients and discussion of the literature.

Authors:  Paul W Veenboer; J L H Ruud Bosch; Floris W A van Asbeck; Laetitia M O de Kort
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2013-04-19       Impact factor: 2.370

7.  Pediatric enterocystoplasty: long-term complications and controversies.

Authors:  Eric A Kurzrock
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2008-10-10       Impact factor: 4.226

8.  [Follow-up care - consequences of urinary diversion after bladder cancer].

Authors:  S Degener; S Roth; M J Mathers; B Ubrig
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 9.  Urolithiasis following urinary diversion.

Authors:  Jai H Seth; Joannis Promponas; Marios Hadjipavlou; Faqar Anjum; Seshadri Sriprasad
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2016-04-25       Impact factor: 3.436

10.  Bladder augmentation: Review of the literature and recent advances.

Authors:  Serhat Gurocak; Jody Nuininga; Iyimser Ure; Robert P E De Gier; Mustafa Ozgur Tan; Wouter Feitz
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2007-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.