Cargando…

Preperitoneal Bladder Augmentation: Feasibility and Results

INTRODUCTION: Bladder augmentation is an important part of pediatric reconstructive urology. This study was conducted to assess the feasibility and results of our technique of preperitoneal bladder augmentation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-three children underwent preperitoneal bladder augmentatio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ghosh, Dhruva Nath, Karl, Sampath, Sen, Sudipta
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5615892/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28974870
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0971-9261.214443
_version_ 1783266685194600448
author Ghosh, Dhruva Nath
Karl, Sampath
Sen, Sudipta
author_facet Ghosh, Dhruva Nath
Karl, Sampath
Sen, Sudipta
author_sort Ghosh, Dhruva Nath
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Bladder augmentation is an important part of pediatric reconstructive urology. This study was conducted to assess the feasibility and results of our technique of preperitoneal bladder augmentation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-three children underwent preperitoneal bladder augmentation for small inelastic bladders who had failed medical management or needed undiversion. The underlying diagnosis included neurogenic bladder, valve bladder, bladder exstrophy, non-neurogenic neurogenic, ectopic ureters, and urogenital sinus. The operative procedure involved placing the entire augmentation in the preperitoneal or subcutaneous space after bivalving the native bladder. The augment segment of the bowel with its pedicle was brought into the preperitoneal space through a small opening in the parietal peritoneum. A Mitrofanoff port was also provided where needed. RESULTS: Preperitoneal augmentation provided an adequately compliant, good volume bladder except in children with bladder exstrophy or previous abdominal surgery. There was a good cystometric recovery, with resolution of hydronephrosis and incontinence. Vesicoureteral reflux resolved in 24 of 26 units. In the 13 children who were uremic preoperatively, there was a significant decrease in serum creatinine levels, although 9 children continued to have supra-normal serum creatinine. Surgical complications seen were within expectations. There was no incidence of intraperitoneal leak, which is the main projected benefit of this procedure over the traditional “intraperitoneal” method of augmentation. CONCLUSIONS: The preperitoneal augmentation provides an adequate, safe, and low-pressure reservoir of urine except in cases of bladder exstrophy and previous abdominal surgery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5615892
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56158922017-10-04 Preperitoneal Bladder Augmentation: Feasibility and Results Ghosh, Dhruva Nath Karl, Sampath Sen, Sudipta J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg Original Article INTRODUCTION: Bladder augmentation is an important part of pediatric reconstructive urology. This study was conducted to assess the feasibility and results of our technique of preperitoneal bladder augmentation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-three children underwent preperitoneal bladder augmentation for small inelastic bladders who had failed medical management or needed undiversion. The underlying diagnosis included neurogenic bladder, valve bladder, bladder exstrophy, non-neurogenic neurogenic, ectopic ureters, and urogenital sinus. The operative procedure involved placing the entire augmentation in the preperitoneal or subcutaneous space after bivalving the native bladder. The augment segment of the bowel with its pedicle was brought into the preperitoneal space through a small opening in the parietal peritoneum. A Mitrofanoff port was also provided where needed. RESULTS: Preperitoneal augmentation provided an adequately compliant, good volume bladder except in children with bladder exstrophy or previous abdominal surgery. There was a good cystometric recovery, with resolution of hydronephrosis and incontinence. Vesicoureteral reflux resolved in 24 of 26 units. In the 13 children who were uremic preoperatively, there was a significant decrease in serum creatinine levels, although 9 children continued to have supra-normal serum creatinine. Surgical complications seen were within expectations. There was no incidence of intraperitoneal leak, which is the main projected benefit of this procedure over the traditional “intraperitoneal” method of augmentation. CONCLUSIONS: The preperitoneal augmentation provides an adequate, safe, and low-pressure reservoir of urine except in cases of bladder exstrophy and previous abdominal surgery. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5615892/ /pubmed/28974870 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0971-9261.214443 Text en Copyright: © 2017 Journal of Indian Association of Pediatric Surgeons http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Ghosh, Dhruva Nath
Karl, Sampath
Sen, Sudipta
Preperitoneal Bladder Augmentation: Feasibility and Results
title Preperitoneal Bladder Augmentation: Feasibility and Results
title_full Preperitoneal Bladder Augmentation: Feasibility and Results
title_fullStr Preperitoneal Bladder Augmentation: Feasibility and Results
title_full_unstemmed Preperitoneal Bladder Augmentation: Feasibility and Results
title_short Preperitoneal Bladder Augmentation: Feasibility and Results
title_sort preperitoneal bladder augmentation: feasibility and results
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5615892/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28974870
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0971-9261.214443
work_keys_str_mv AT ghoshdhruvanath preperitonealbladderaugmentationfeasibilityandresults
AT karlsampath preperitonealbladderaugmentationfeasibilityandresults
AT sensudipta preperitonealbladderaugmentationfeasibilityandresults