Journal of Pediatric Urology
Volume 4, Issue 1 , Pages 8-13, February 2008

Bladder augmentation and artificial sphincter implantation: Urodynamic behavior and effects on continence

Surgery Service, Hospital Sant Joan de Déu Avda, Sant Joan de Déu, 2 Esplugues de Llobregat, 08950 Barcelona, Spain

Received 12 December 2006; accepted 28 February 2007. published online 10 May 2007.

Abstract 

Objective

To quantify changes in bladder capacity, pressure and compliance after isolated bladder augmentation or augmentation associated with implantation of an artificial sphincter, and to compare the various types of augmentation.

Patients and methods

Preoperative and postoperative urodynamic studies were performed in a group of 38 patients (18 males and 20 females; age range 2–19 years), who underwent a type of bladder augmentation.

Results

The bladder improved in capacity in all patients (mean values: initial 137ml, final 336ml, individual increase 229ml; 434%) except two, in which the augmentation was done with ureter. The mean pressure improved (initial 32cm of H2O, final 14, decrease per patient 18cm of H2O; 49%). The curve of compliance, progressively increasing typical of hyperreflexia and poor compliance, present in 70% of the cases preoperatively, improved in 78% cases postoperatively, although there were several different patterns. Urodynamic behavior was analyzed with regard to the tissue used for augmentation (ileum, ureter or sigmoid colon). In the sigmoid colon group, there were no significant differences in the urodynamic behavior of the bladder neo-reservoir in relation to the configuration used.

Conclusion

With bladder augmentation comes an increase in bladder capacity, a reduction in pressure, and an improvement in compliance and continence. The level of change in capacity, pressure and compliance varies with the tissue used and the length and caliber of the insert. When the procedure is carried out using sigmoid colon tissue, there are no noteworthy differences among the various possible configurations.

Keywords: Bladder augmentation, Urodynamics, Ileocystoplasty, Colocystoplasty, Ureterocystoplasty, Artificial sphincter

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1477-5131(07)00279-3

doi:10.1016/j.jpurol.2007.02.009

Journal of Pediatric Urology
Volume 4, Issue 1 , Pages 8-13, February 2008