Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Patient Selection, Operative Technique, and Contemporary Outcomes of Continent Catheterizable Diversion: the Indiana Pouch

  • Reconstructed Bladder Function and Dysfunction (G Bales, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Techniques for continent cutaneous urinary diversion (CCD) have evolved considerably over the last 65 years. The Indiana pouch (IP) was initially described in the 1980s and has gained wide acceptance among urologists. For patients who desire continent urinary diversion, many clinical scenarios and individual preferences continue to make the IP an excellent option for appropriately selected patients. Continence rates for the IP are generally satisfactory and compare favorably with orthotopic neobladder. Unfortunately, radical cystectomy with urinary diversion is associated with a high complication rate. We discuss short-term (<90 days) and long-term complications for CCD with attention to specific complications related to the efferent limb and continent pouch. Finally, we discuss health-related quality of life (HRQOL) after IP urinary diversion with comparison to the orthotopic neobladder and conduit diversion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Cody JD, Nabi G, Dublin N, McClinton S, Neal DE, Pickard R et al. Urinary diversion and bladder reconstruction/replacement using intestinal segments for intractable incontinence or following cystectomy. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2012;2:CD003306. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003306.pub2

  2. Lee RK, Abol-Enein H, Artibani W, Bochner B, Dalbagni G, Daneshmand S, et al. Urinary diversion after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: options, patient selection, and outcomes. BJU Int. 2014;113(1):11–23. doi:10.1111/bju.12121. High quality review article which examines the pros and cons of various options for urinary diversion after radical cystectomy. The article reviews criteria for patient selection as well as outcomes for various types of urinary diversion including continent cutaneous diversion.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rink MK L, Eichelberg E, Fisch M, Dahlem R. Continent catheterizable pouches for urinary diversion. Eur Urol Suppl. 2010;9:754–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Rowland RG. Present experience with the Indiana pouch. World J Urol. 1996;14(2):92–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Verhoogen J. Neostomie uretero-cecale formation d’une poche vesicale et d’un noveau uretre. Assoc Franc d’Urol. 1908;12:352–65.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gilchrist RK, Merricks JW, Hamlin HH, Rieger IT. Construction of a substitute bladder and urethra. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1950;90(6):752–60.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kock NG, Nilson AE, Nilsson LO, Norlen LJ, Philipson BM. Urinary diversion via a continent ileal reservoir: clinical results in 12 patients. J Urol. 1982;128(3):469–75.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Rowland RGM ME, Bihrle R. The ileocecal continent urinary reservoir. World J Urol. 1985;3:185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Mansson W, Davidsson T, Colleen S. The detubularized right colonic segment as urinary reservoir: evolution of technique for continent diversion. J Urol. 1990;144(6):1359–61.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bejany DE, Politano VA. Stapled and nonstapled tapered distal ileum for construction of a continent colonic urinary reservoir. J Urol. 1988;140(3):491–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lockhart JL. Remodeled right colon: an alternative urinary reservoir. J Urol. 1987;138(4):730–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Thuroff JW, Alken P, Engelmann U, Riedmiller H, Jacobi GH, Hohenfellner R. The Mainz pouch (mixed augmentation ileum’n zecum) for bladder augmentation and continent urinary diversion. Eur Urol. 1985;11(3):152–60.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Riedmiller H, Burger R, Muller S, Thuroff J, Hohenfellner R. Continent appendix stoma: a modification of the Mainz pouch technique. J Urol. 1990;143(6):1115–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hautmann RE, Abol-Enein H, Hafez K, Haro I, Mansson W, Mills RD, et al. Urinary diversion. Urology. 2007;69(1 Suppl):17–49. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2006.05.058.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ashley MS, Daneshmand S. Factors influencing the choice of urinary diversion in patients undergoing radical cystectomy. BJU Int. 2010;106(5):654–7. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410×.2009.09183.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hautmann RE. Which patients with transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder or prostatic urethra are candidates for an orthotopic neobladder? Curr Uro Rep. 2000;1(3):173–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Hautmann RE. Urinary diversion: ileal conduit to neobladder. J Urol. 2003;169(3):834–42. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000029010.97686.eb.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Granberg CF, Boorjian SA, Crispen PL, Tollefson MK, Farmer SA, Frank I, et al. Functional and oncological outcomes after orthotopic neobladder reconstruction in women. BJU Int. 2008;102(11):1551–5. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410×.2008.07909.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Jentzmik F, Schrader AJ, de Petriconi R, Hefty R, Mueller J, Doetterl J, et al. The ileal neobladder in female patients with bladder cancer: long-term clinical, functional, and oncological outcome. World J Urol. 2012;30(6):733–9. doi:10.1007/s00345-012-0837-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lee CT, Hafez KS, Sheffield JH, Joshi DP, Montie JE. Orthotopic bladder substitution in women: nontraditional applications. J Urol. 2004;171(4):1585–8. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000116547.75199.44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Stein JP, Penson DF, Lee C, Cai J, Miranda G, Skinner DG. Long-term oncological outcomes in women undergoing radical cystectomy and orthotopic diversion for bladder cancer. J Urol. 2009;181(5):2052–8. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2009.01.020. discussion 8–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Maffezzini M, Campodonico F, Canepa G, Gerbi G, Parodi D. Current perioperative management of radical cystectomy with intestinal urinary reconstruction for muscle-invasive bladder cancer and reduction of the incidence of postoperative ileus. Surg Oncol. 2008;17(1):41–8. doi:10.1016/j.suronc.2007.09.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Guenaga KF, Matos D, Wille-Jorgensen P. Mechanical bowel preparation for elective colorectal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;9, CD001544. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001544.pub4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Large MC, Kiriluk KJ, DeCastro GJ, Patel AR, Prasad S, Jayram G, et al. The impact of mechanical bowel preparation on postoperative complications for patients undergoing cystectomy and urinary diversion. J Urol. 2012;188(5):1801–5. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2012.07.039. This study describes a single surgeon experience before and after a change of practice by eliminating mechanical bowel preparation before radical cystectomy and ileal conduit or orthotopic neobladder reconstruction. 105 patients underwent bowel preparation and 75 did not, with no significant difference in perioperative infectious, wound, and bowel complications.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Daneshmand S, Ahmadi H, Schuckman AK, Mitra AP, Cai J, Miranda G, et al. Enhanced recovery protocol after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. J Urol. 2014. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2014.01.097. This is a single center experience of 126 consecutive patients undergoing open radical cystectomy and urinary diversion. Utilization of an enhanced recovery protocol after surgery resulted in expedited bowel function recovery and shorter length of stay, without increase in readmission.

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Maffezzini M, Campodonico F, Capponi G, Manuputty E, Gerbi G. Fast-track surgery and technical nuances to reduce complications after radical cystectomy and intestinal urinary diversion with the modified Indiana pouch. Surg Oncol. 2012;21(3):191–5. doi:10.1016/j.suronc.2012.02.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Elkassabany N, Ahmed M, Malkowicz SB, Heitjan DF, Isserman JA, Ochroch EA. Comparison between the analgesic efficacy of transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block and placebo in open retropubic radical prostatectomy: a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. J Clin Anesth. 2013;25(6):459–65. doi:10.1016/j.jclinane.2013.04.009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lee CT, Chang SS, Kamat AM, Amiel G, Beard TL, Fergany A, et al. Alvimopan accelerates gastrointestinal recovery after radical cystectomy: a multicenter randomized placebo-controlled trial. Eur Urol. 2014. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2014.02.036. Multi-center, randomized, placebo-controlled trial which demonstrated alvimopam use leads to quicker recovery of bowel function and shorter hospital stay compared to placebo, with no increase in complications.

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Rasmussen MS, Jorgensen LN, Wille-Jorgensen P. Prolonged thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin for abdominal or pelvic surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;1, CD004318. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004318.pub2.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hautmann RE, de Petriconi RC, Volkmer BG. Lessons learned from 1,000 neobladders: the 90-day complication rate. J Urol. 2010;184(3):990–4. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2010.05.037. quiz 1235.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Madersbacher S, Schmidt J, Eberle JM, Thoeny HC, Burkhard F, Hochreiter W, et al. Long-term outcome of ileal conduit diversion. J Urol. 2003;169(3):985–90. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000051462.45388.14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Shimko MS, Tollefson MK, Umbreit EC, Farmer SA, Blute ML, Frank I. Long-term complications of conduit urinary diversion. J Urol. 2011;185(2):562–7. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2010.09.096. Retrospective study examining long term complications in patients (n = 1,057) who underwent radical cystectomy and conduit urinary diversion. The complication rate was high at 60.8 % but reoperation rate was low. Additionally this study highlights the need for long-term follow-up because complications can occur decades after surgery.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Bachir BG, Kassouf W. Urinary diversions: advantages and disadvantages of the major types of diversions. Curr Opin Support Palliat Care. 2013;7(3):249–53. doi:10.1097/SPC.0b013e3283627903.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Lowrance WT, Rumohr JA, Clark PE, Chang SS, Smith Jr JA, Cookson MS. Urinary diversion trends at a high volume, single American tertiary care center. J Urol. 2009;182(5):2369–74. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2009.07.026.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Cookson MS, Chang SS, Wells N, Parekh DJ, Smith Jr JA. Complications of radical cystectomy for nonmuscle invasive disease: comparison with muscle invasive disease. J Urol. 2003;169(1):101–4. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000039521.77948.f9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Nazmy M, Yuh B, Kawachi M, Lau CS, Linehan J, Ruel NH, et al. Early and late complications of robot-assisted radical cystectomy: a standardized analysis by urinary diversion type. J Urol. 2014;191(3):681–7. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2013.10.022. Retrospective study which examined early (<90 days) and late complications after robot-assisted radical cystectomy with extra-corporeal urinary diverion in 209 consecutive patients, including 48 patients who underwent Indiana pouch construction.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Nieuwenhuijzen JA, de Vries RR, Bex A, van der Poel HG, Meinhardt W, Antonini N, et al. Urinary diversions after cystectomy: the association of clinical factors, complications and functional results of four different diversions. Eur Urol. 2008;53(4):42–4. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2007.09.008. Retrospective study of 281 consecutive cystectomies which examines clinical factors, complication rates, functional results, and metabolic complications after cystectomy with analysis based on the type of urinary diversion. 51 patients underwent Indiana pouch urinary diversion. The Indiana pouch was associated with comparable complication rates to orthotopic neobladder and significantly better continence outcomes.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Richards KA, Steinberg GD. Perioperative outcomes in radical cystectomy: how to reduce morbidity? Curr Opin Urol. 2013;23(5):456–65. doi:10.1097/MOU.0b013e32836392bb.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205–13.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Hautmann RE, Hautmann SH, Hautmann O. Complications associated with urinary diversion. Nat Rev Urol. 2011;8(12):667–77. doi:10.1038/nrurol.2011.147.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Morgan M, Smith N, Thomas K, Murphy DG. Is Clavien the new standard for reporting urological complications? BJU Int. 2009;104(4):434–6. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410×.2009.08516.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Hollenbeck BK, Miller DC, Taub D, Dunn RL, Khuri SF, Henderson WG, et al. Identifying risk factors for potentially avoidable complications following radical cystectomy. J Urol. 2005;174(4 Pt 1):1231–7. discussion 7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Shabsigh A, Korets R, Vora KC, Brooks CM, Cronin AM, Savage C, et al. Defining early morbidity of radical cystectomy for patients with bladder cancer using a standardized reporting methodology. Eur Urol. 2009;55(1):164–74. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2008.07.031.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Bochner BH, Karanikolas N, Barakat RR, Wong D, Chi DS. Ureteroileocecal appendicostomy based urinary reservoir in irradiated and nonirradiated patients. J Urol. 2009;182(5):2376–80. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2009.07.038.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Ahlering TE, Weinberg AC, Razor B. A comparative study of the ileal conduit, Kock pouch and modified Indiana pouch. J Urol. 1989;142(5):1193–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Arai Y, Kawakita M, Terachi T, Oishi K, Okada Y, Takeuchi H, et al. Long-term followup of the Kock and Indiana pouch procedures. J Urol. 1993;150(1):51–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Bihrle R. The Indiana pouch continent urinary reservoir. Urol clin N Am. 1997;24(4):773–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Carr LK, Webster GD. Kock versus right colon continent urinary diversion: comparison of outcome and reoperation rate. Urology. 1996;48(5):711–4. doi:10.1016/S0090-4295(96)00424-4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Fisch M, Thuroff JW. Continent cutaneous diversion. BJU international. 2008;102(9 Pt B):1314–9. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410×.2008.07976.×

  50. Holmes DG, Thrasher JB, Park GY, Kueker DC, Weigel JW. Long-term complications related to the modified Indiana pouch. Urology. 2002;60(4):603–6. This is a single-institution, single-surgeon experience of 125 patients who underwent Indiana pouch during a 14-year periord with mean follow-up of 41.1 months. This study provides a very detailed description of the high rates of long-term complications that can occur after Indiana pouch urinary diversion.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Navon JD, Wong AK, Weinberg AC, Ahlering TE. A comparative study of postoperative complications associated with the modified Indiana pouch in elderly versus younger patients. J Urol. 1995;154(4):1325–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Rowland RG, Kropp BP. Evolution of the Indiana continent urinary reservoir. J Urol. 1994;152(6 Pt 2):2247–51.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Weijerman PC, Schurmans JR, Hop WC, Schroder FH, Bosch JL. Morbidity and quality of life in patients with orthotopic and heterotopic continent urinary diversion. Urology. 1998;51(1):51–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Wilson TG, Moreno JG, Weinberg A, Ahlering TE. Late complications of the modified Indiana pouch. J Urol. 1994;151(2):331–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Wiesner C, Bonfig R, Stein R, Gerharz EW, Pahernik S, Riedmiller H, et al. Continent cutaneous urinary diversion: long-term follow-up of more than 800 patients with ileocecal reservoirs. World J Urol. 2006;24(3):315–8. doi:10.1007/s00345-006-0078-y. The authors report their clinical outcomes and long-term complications in over 800 patients who underwent continent cutaneous urinary diversion with an ileocecal reservoir (Mainz pouch 1) with mean follow-up of 7.6 years.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Abol-Enein H, Salem M, Mesbah A, Abdel-Latif M, Kamal M, Shabaan A, et al. Continent cutaneous ileal pouch using the serous lined extramural valves. the Mansoura experience in more than 100 patients. J Urol. 2004;172(2):588–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Mansson W, Davidsson T, Konyves J, Liedberg F, Mansson A, Wullt B. Continent urinary tract reconstruction—the Lund experience. BJU Int. 2003;92(3):271–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Webster C, Bukkapatnam R, Seigne JD, Pow-Sang J, Hoffman M, Helal M, et al. Continent colonic urinary reservoir (Florida pouch): long-term surgical complications (greater than 11 years). J Urol. 2003;169(1):174–6. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000038954.98838.34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Wiesner C, Pahernik S, Stein R, Hahn K, Franzaring L, Melchior SW, et al. Long-term follow-up of submucosal tunnel and serosa-lined extramural tunnel ureter implantation in ileocaecal continent cutaneous urinary diversion (Mainz pouch I). BJU Int. 2007;100(3):633–7. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410×.2007.06991.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Kristjansson A, Wallin L, Mansson W. Renal function up to 16 years after conduit (refluxing or anti-reflux anastomosis) or continent urinary diversion. 1. Glomerular filtration rate and patency of uretero-intestinal anastomosis. Br J Urol. 1995;76(5):539–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Harraz AM, Mosbah A, Abdel-Latif M, El-Assmy A, Gad H, Shaaban AA. Impact of the type of ureteroileal anastomosis on renal function measured by diuretic scintigraphy: long-term results of a prospective randomized study. BJU international. 2013. doi:10.1111/bju.12511. Long-term results from a prospective randomized study comparing renal function for renal units after refluxing versus anti-refluxing ureteroileal anastomosis. They found no difference in renal function between the two groups at a median follow-up of 6-years.

  62. Studer UE, Danuser H, Thalmann GN, Springer JP, Turner WH. Antireflux nipples or afferent tubular segments in 70 patients with ileal low pressure bladder substitutes: long-term results of a prospective randomized trial. J Urol. 1996;156(6):1913–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Salom EM, Mendez LE, Schey D, Lambrou N, Kassira N, Gomez-Marn O, et al. Continent ileocolonic urinary reservoir (Miami pouch): the University of Miami experience over 15 years. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;190(4):994–1003. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2004.01.023.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Wilkin M, Horwitz G, Seetharam A, Hartenbach E, Schink JC, Bruskewitz R, et al. Long-term complications associated with the Indiana pouch urinary diversion in patients with recurrent gynecologic cancers after high-dose radiation. Urol Oncol. 2005;23(1):12–5. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2004.07.018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Mills RD, Studer UE. Metabolic consequences of continent urinary diversion. J Urol. 1999;161(4):1057–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Koch MO, McDougal WS. Bone demineralization following ureterosigmoid anastomosis: an experimental study in rats. J Urol. 1988;140(4):856–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Yakout H, Bissada NK. Intermediate effects of the ileocaecal urinary reservoir (Charleston pouch 1) on serum vitamin B12 concentrations: can vitamin B12 deficiency be prevented? BJU Int. 2003;91(7):653–5. discussion 5–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Cella DF, Tulsky DS. Quality of life in cancer: definition, purpose, and method of measurement. Cancer Investig. 1993;11(3):327–36.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Bjerre BD, Johansen C, Steven K. Health-related quality of life after cystectomy: bladder substitution compared with ileal conduit diversion. A questionnaire Surv Br J Urol. 1995;75(2):200–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Hardt J, Filipas D, Hohenfellner R, Egle UT. Quality of life in patients with bladder carcinoma after cystectomy: first results of a prospective study. Qual Life Res Int J Qual Life Asp Treat Care Rehabil. 2000;9(1):1–12.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Hobisch A, Tosun K, Kinzl J, Kemmler G, Bartsch G, Holtl L, et al. Life after cystectomy and orthotopic neobladder versus ileal conduit urinary diversion. Semin Urol Oncol. 2001;19(1):18–23.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Kitamura H, Miyao N, Yanase M, Masumori N, Matsukawa M, Takahashi A, et al. Quality of life in patients having an ileal conduit, continent reservoir or orthotopic neobladder after cystectomy for bladder carcinoma. Int J Urol Off J Japan Urol Assoc. 1999;6(8):393–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Large MC, Katz MH, Shikanov S, Eggener SE, Steinberg GD. Orthotopic neobladder versus Indiana pouch in women: a comparison of health related quality of life outcomes. The Journal of urology. 2010;183(1):201–6. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2009.08.148. This is an analysis of health related quality of life of 47 women with an orthotopic neobladder and 45 women with an Indiana pouch. They found no significant difference in health related quality of life between Indiana pouch and orthotopic neobladder in women.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Mansson A, Davidsson T, Hunt S, Mansson W. The quality of life in men after radical cystectomy with a continent cutaneous diversion or orthotopic bladder substitution: is there a difference? BJU Int. 2002;90(4):386–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Pazooki D, Edlund C, Dahlstrand C, Lindholm E, Tornqvist H, Jonsson O. Continent cutaneous urinary diversion is still a valid alternative after cystectomy for bladder carcinoma. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2005;39(6):468–73. doi:10.1080/00365590500191001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

Shane M. Pearce, Joshua A. Cohn, Zoe Steinberg, and Gary D. Steinberg declare no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Section of Urology, University of Chicago Medicine, 5841 S. Maryland Ave, MC 6038, Chicago, IL, 60637, USA

    Shane M. Pearce, Joshua A. Cohn, Zoe Steinberg & Gary D. Steinberg

Authors
  1. Shane M. Pearce
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joshua A. Cohn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zoe Steinberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Gary D. Steinberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shane M. Pearce.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pearce, S.M., Cohn, J.A., Steinberg, Z. et al. Patient Selection, Operative Technique, and Contemporary Outcomes of Continent Catheterizable Diversion: the Indiana Pouch. Curr Bladder Dysfunct Rep 9, 293–301 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11884-014-0265-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11884-014-0265-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation