Literature DB >> 25444630

Treatment of pouch stones after augmentation ileocystoplasty in children: is it always bothersome?

Tamer E Helmy1, Mohammed M Elawdy2, Ahmed AbdelHalim2, Hesham Orban2, Hossam Nabeeh2, Mohammed Dawaba2, Ashraf T Hafez2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To report our experience with different approaches for management of pouch stones in children with ileal-based urinary reservoir. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Charts of children who underwent ileal-based urinary reservoirs between 2000 and 2009 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who were diagnosed with reservoir calculi were identified; medical records were reviewed for patients' demographics, diversion details, stone criteria, mode of treatment, perioperative complications, and recurrence rate.
RESULTS: We identified 26 children with pouch stones after urinary diversion. There were 11 boys (42%) and 15 girls (58%). Mean age was 11 years (range, 4-16 years). Mean time for diagnosis was 42 months (24-120 months). Pouch stones were asymptomatic in 10 patients (38%). Fifteen cases were postbladder augmentation and 11 cases postcontinent cutaneous diversion. The mean stone size was 4 cm (range, 1-10 cm), and mean Hounsfield Unit was 585 (205-1090). Seventeen children (65%) had positive urine culture result, whereas 9 children were sterile. Seven children (27%) required open poucholithotomy, whereas 19 patients (73%) were managed endoscopically. Percutaneous approach was done in 5 children, whereas urethral access was used in 7 children. Mechanical extraction was performed in 12 cases, and stone disintegration was required in 7 cases. Eight children developed stone recurrence. Mean time for recurrence was 11 months (range, 3-19 months). Six children were after endoscopic disintegration, and all required redo endoscopic extraction. Stone analysis was available in 15 patients (struvite stones in 10 cases and calcium phosphate in 5 cases).
CONCLUSION: Pouch stones are established long-term complication of urinary diversion. Open and endoscopic approaches are valid treatment strategies.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25444630     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.09.021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  2 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Management of Indiana pouch stones through a percutaneous approach: A single center experience.

Authors:  Mesut Öztürk; John C McDermott; Paul F Laeseke; Stephen Y Nakada; Sean P Hedican; Sara L Best; Mark G Kleedehn
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2019-09-01
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.