Comparison of effectiveness and complications between two different methods of augmentation cystoplasty

  • Chen LIANG ,
  • Wei-yu ZHANG ,
  • Hao HU ,
  • Qi WANG ,
  • Zhi-wei FANG ,
  • Ke-xin XU
Expand
  • Department of Urology, Peking University People’s Hospital, Beijing 100044, China

Received date: 2017-03-15

  Online published: 2019-04-26

Abstract

Objective: To compare the effectiveness and complications between enterocystoplasty and small intestinal submucosa (SIS) cystoplasty through follow-ups of patients with augmentation cystoplasty in Peking University People’s Hospital, offering alternative approach for future treatment.Methods: In this study, retrospective analyses were carried out in 10 patients who underwent enterocystoplasty or SIS cystoplasty in Peking University People’s Hospital from November 2011 to December 2016. Clinical data were collected including medical history, surgical procedures, laboratory examinations and complications. And then regular follow-ups were developed. Ten patients were separated into groups of enterocystoplasty (n=6) and SIS cystoplasty (n=4), to compare their outcomes.Results: Ten patients all completed the follow-up interview. Five cases underwent augmentation cystoplasty with sigmoid colon, one with ileum and four with SIS cystoplasty successfully. The mean operative time was (302.0±66.6) min, and blood loss was (167.0±135.0) mL. The outcomes of the group of SIS cystoplasty were better in respects of the time of operation, intestinal function recovery, postoperative hospitalization duration and drainage removal. The average scores of American Urological Association symptom score (AUASS), overactive bladder syndrome score (OABSS), International Consultation on Incontinence questionnaire short form (ICI-Q-SF), and O’Leary-Sant Questionnaire were all improved in two groups. Two cases carried clean intermittent self catheterazion and two used long-term indwelling catheter. There were three patients with dilations of renal pelvises and ureters consistently or during bladder was filling preoperatively, and the situations were not going bad after the operations. The short-term complications included two cases of postoperative infection, one case of mild intestinal obstruction and one case of metabolic acidosis. The long-term complications included one case of ureteroinstestinal anastomosis strictures, three of urinary tract infection and one of long-term metabolic acidosis.Conclusion: Enterocystoplasty and SIS cystoplasty are both effective operations to improve symptoms and protect upper urinary function, with no severe complications. Cystoscopic results showed satisfactory mucosa regeneration after SIS cystoplaty in refractory interstitial cystitis/painful bladder syndrome. But the number of patients included were quite small and the follow-up period was not long enough. Prospective control study of larger number of patients with longer follow-ups are expected to find out the effectiveness and safety of SIS cystoplasty.

Cite this article

Chen LIANG , Wei-yu ZHANG , Hao HU , Qi WANG , Zhi-wei FANG , Ke-xin XU . Comparison of effectiveness and complications between two different methods of augmentation cystoplasty[J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2019 , 51(2) : 293 -297 . DOI: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2019.02.018

References

[1] Biers SM, Venn SN, Greenwell TJ . The past, present and future of augmentation cystoplasty[J]. BJU Int, 2012,109(9):1280-1293.
[2] Drake M, Apostolidis A, Emmanuel A , et al. Neurologicalurinary and faecal incontinence[M]. Paris: ICUD-EAU, 2013: 827-954.
[3] Groen J, Pannek J, Castro DD , et al. Summary of European Association of Urology (EAU)guidelines on neurourology[J]. Eur Urol, 2016,69(2):324-333.
[4] Stohrer M, Goepel M, Kondo A , et al. The standardization of terminology in neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction: with suggestions for diagnostic procedures. International Continence Society Standardization Committee[J]. Neurourol Urodyn, 1999,18(2):139-158.
[5] Manack A, Motsko SP, Haag-Molkenteller C , et al. Epidemiology and healthcare utilization of neurogenic bladder patients in a US claims database[J]. Neurourol Urodyn, 2011,30(3):395-401.
[6] European Association Of Urology. Guidelines on neurogenic low urinary tract dysfunction (2012) [EB/OL]. [ 2016- 09- 25] .
[7] Consortium for Spinal Cord Medicine. Bladder management for adults with spinal cord injury: a clinical practice guideline for health-care providers[J]. J Spinal Cord Med, 2006,29(5):527-573.
[8] Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M , et al. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the Standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2002,187(1):116-126.
[9] Davis NF, Brady CM, Creagh T . Interstitial cystitis/painful bladder syndrome: epidemiology, pathophysiology and evidence-based treatment options[J]. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 2014,175:30-37.
[10] Dahms SE, Piechota HJ, Dahiya R , et al. Composition and biomechanical properties of the bladder acellular matrix graft: comparative analysis in rat, pig and human[J]. Br J Urol, 1998,82(3):411-419.
[11] Kropp BP . Small-intestinal submucosa for bladder augmentation: a review of preclinical studies[J]. World J Urol, 1998,16(4):262-267.
[12] Kropp BP, Sawyer BD, Shannon HE , et al. Characterization of small intestinal submucosa regenerated canine detrusor: assessment of reinnervation, in vitro compliance and contractility[J]. J Urol, 1996,156(2 Pt 2):599-607.
[13] Kropp BP, Cheng EY, Lin HK , et al. Reliable and reproducible bladder regeneration using unseeded distal small intestinal submucosa[J]. J Urol, 2004,172(4 Pt 2):1710-1713.
[14] Kropp BP, Cheng EY . Bioengineering organs using small intestinal submucosa scaffolds: in vivo tissue-engineering technology[J]. J Endourol, 2000,14(1):59-62.
[15] Liao L, Zhang F, Chen G . Midterm outcomes of protection for upper urinary tract function by augmentation enterocystoplasty in patients with neurogenic bladder[J]. Int Urol Nephrol, 2014,46(11):2117-2125.
[16] Lam Van Ba O, Aharony S, Loutochin O , et al. Bladder tissue engineering: a literature review[J]. Adv Drug Deliv Rev, 2015, 82-83:31-37.
Outlines

/