PURPOSE: Seromuscular colocystoplasty lined with urothelium is a method of bladder augmentation that avoids incorporating intestinal mucosa into the urinary tract. Others have reported a repeat augmentation rate of 23%. We analyzed the results in 20 patients who underwent the procedure, as performed by one of us (RG), at 3 institutions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After receiving institutional review board approval we retrospectively reviewed the charts of all patients operated on since 1998. Preoperative and postoperative bladder capacity at 30 cm H(2)O, expressed as the percent of expected capacity for age using the equation, bladder capacity in ml = (age +1) x 30, as well as prior, concomitant and subsequent bladder or bladder neck procedures, continence and the need for repeat augmentation were recorded. RESULTS: There were 20 patients, including 7 females, with a mean age at surgery of 9 years and a mean followup of 53 months. All patients had neurogenic bladder dysfunction. An artificial urinary sphincter was implanted at the time of seromuscular colocystoplasty in 10 patients, preoperatively in 6 and postoperatively in 1. A sling was used in 3 females. Patients were divided into 2 groups. The 15 group 1 patients underwent no concomitant procedure in the bladder and the 5 in group 2 underwent creation of a continent channel at seromuscular colocystoplasty. There were no failures of augmentation in group 1, in which bladder capacity increased from 60% of that expected for age to 100%. All patients were continent. Three of the 5 patients in group 2 required repeat augmentation. CONCLUSIONS: Seromuscular colocystoplasty lined with urothelium has proved to be an effective method to augment the bladder in patients who have an artificial urinary sphincter or who undergo simultaneous artificial urinary sphincter implantation. We do not recommend constructing a continent catheterizable channel at the time of seromuscular colocystoplasty lined with urothelium.
PURPOSE: Seromuscular colocystoplasty lined with urothelium is a method of bladder augmentation that avoids incorporating intestinal mucosa into the urinary tract. Others have reported a repeat augmentation rate of 23%. We analyzed the results in 20 patients who underwent the procedure, as performed by one of us (RG), at 3 institutions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After receiving institutional review board approval we retrospectively reviewed the charts of all patients operated on since 1998. Preoperative and postoperative bladder capacity at 30 cm H(2)O, expressed as the percent of expected capacity for age using the equation, bladder capacity in ml = (age +1) x 30, as well as prior, concomitant and subsequent bladder or bladder neck procedures, continence and the need for repeat augmentation were recorded. RESULTS: There were 20 patients, including 7 females, with a mean age at surgery of 9 years and a mean followup of 53 months. All patients had neurogenic bladder dysfunction. An artificial urinary sphincter was implanted at the time of seromuscular colocystoplasty in 10 patients, preoperatively in 6 and postoperatively in 1. A sling was used in 3 females. Patients were divided into 2 groups. The 15 group 1 patients underwent no concomitant procedure in the bladder and the 5 in group 2 underwent creation of a continent channel at seromuscular colocystoplasty. There were no failures of augmentation in group 1, in which bladder capacity increased from 60% of that expected for age to 100%. All patients were continent. Three of the 5 patients in group 2 required repeat augmentation. CONCLUSIONS: Seromuscular colocystoplasty lined with urothelium has proved to be an effective method to augment the bladder in patients who have an artificial urinary sphincter or who undergo simultaneous artificial urinary sphincter implantation. We do not recommend constructing a continent catheterizable channel at the time of seromuscular colocystoplasty lined with urothelium.
Authors: R Stein; C Assion; R Beetz; M Bürst; R Cremer; A Ermert; M Goepel; E Kuwertz-Bröking; B Ludwikowski; T Michael; J Pannek; H Peters; D Rohrmann; I Rübben; A Schröder; R Trollmann; J W Thüroff; W Wagner Journal: Urologe A Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 0.639
Authors: Alex Turner; Ramnath Subramanian; David F M Thomas; Jennifer Hinley; Syed Khawar Abbas; Jens Stahlschmidt; Jennifer Southgate Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2010-12-22 Impact factor: 20.096