Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation and Management of Failed Bladder Reconstructions

  • Reconstructed Bladder Function & Dysfunction (M Kaufman, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Bladder reconstructions are commonly performed in patients with neurogenic bladders with a high rate of complications. We seek to help guide the evaluation and management of these complications by reviewing the available data. Augmentation cystoplasty and concomitant procedures such as continent catheterizable channels, bladder neck closure, and bladder neck sling can provide long-term solutions for patients with poorly compliant, high-pressure bladders or refractory detrusor overactivity. While these techniques improve symptoms and protect against upper tract deterioration, patients are exposed to new risks including bladder perforation, increased malignancy rates, urolithiasis, surgical failures, and persistent symptoms. The overall rate of reoperation is high. Evaluation with urodynamics and endoscopy, when indicated, remain critical tools to protect this patient population. Use of clean intermittent catheterization has helped popularize bladder reconstructive surgery, but a strict regimen is required to minimize postoperative risks in the long term. Additionally, various surgical techniques can be utilized to manage complications after bladder reconstruction, and concurrent use of anticholinergics and onabotulinum toxin injections can further mitigate these reconstructive failures. Bladder reconstruction can provide excellent long-term solutions, but patients are at a high risk of long-term complications. Appropriate patient counseling, close follow-up, and timely evaluation are crucial in managing the long-term complications of bladder reconstruction surgery.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

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

  1. Lawrenson R, Wyndaele JJ, Vlachonikolis I, et al. Renal failure in patients with neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction. Neuroepidemiology. 2001;20:138–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Vajda P, Kispal Z, Lenart I, et al. Quality of life: urinary bladder augmentation or substitution in children. Pediatr Surg Int. 2009;25:195–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lima DX, Pires CR, Santon AC, et al. Quality of life evaluation of patients with neurogenic bladder submitted to reconstructive urologic surgeries preserving the bladder. Int Braz J Urol. 2015;41(3):542–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. McGuire EJ, Woodside JR, Borden TA, et al. Prognostic value of urodynamic testing in myelodysplastic patients. J Urol. 1981;126:205–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Biers SM, Venn SN, Greenwell TJ. The past, present and future of augmentation cystoplasty. BJU Int. 2011;109:1280–93. This is a comprehensive review of augmentation cystoplasty including indications, surgical options, complications, and the potential future of this operation.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Leslie B, Lorenzo AJ, Moore K, et al. Long-term followup and time to event outcome analysis of continent catheterizable channels. J Urol. 2011;185:2298–302.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kispal Z, Balogh D, Erdei O, et al. Complications after bladder augmentation or substitution in children: a prospective study of 86 patients. BJU Int. 2010;108:282–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Veeratterapillay R, Thorpe AC, Harding C. Augmentation cystoplasty: contemporary indications, techniques, and complications. Indian J Urol. 2013;29(4):322–7.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sountoulides P et al. Complications following augmentation cystoplasty: prevention and management. Cen Eur J Urol. 2009;62(4):216–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Fontaine E et al. The effect of intestinal urinary reservoirs on renal function: a 10-year follow-up. BJU Int. 2000;86:195–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. DeFoor W, Minevich E, Sekhon D, et al. Bladder calculi after augmentation cystoplasty: risk factors and prevention strategies. J Urol. 2004;172(5):1964–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Elder JS et al. Perforation of the augmented bladder in patients undergoing clean intermittent catheterization. J Urol. 1998;140:1159–62.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Shekarriz B, Upadhyay J, Demirbilek S, et al. Surgical complications of bladder augmentation: comparison between various enterocystoplasties in 133 patients. Urology. 2000;55(1):123–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. DeFoor W, Tackett L, Minevich E, et al. Risk factors for spontaneous bladder perforation after augmentation cystoplasty. Urology. 2003;62:737–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Metcalfe PD, Casale AJ, Kaefer MA, et al. Spontaneous bladder perforations: a report of 500 augmentations in children and analysis of risk. J Urol. 2006;175:1466–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Schlomer BJ, Copp HL. Cumulative incidence of outcomes and urologic procedures after augmentation cystoplasty. J Pediatr Urol. 2014;10(6):1043–50.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Slaton JW, Kroop KA. Conservative management of suspected bladder rupture after augmentation enterocystoplasty. J Urol. 1994;152(2):713e5.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Higuchi TT, Granberg CF, Fox JA, et al. Augmentation cystoplasty and risk of neoplasia: fact, fiction, and controversy. J Urol. 2010;184:2492–7. This article investigates the risk of malignancy in patients with bladder augmentation, and uses a matched control patient population on clean intermittent catheterization to evaluate bladder augmentation as an independent risk factor.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Soergel TM, Cain MP, Misseri R, et al. Transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder following augmentation cystoplasty for the neuropathic bladder. J Urol. 2004;172:1649–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Husmann DA. Malignancy after gastrointestinal augmentation in childhood. Ther Adv Urol. 2009;1(1):5–11.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hamid R, Greenwell TJ, Nethercliffe JM, et al. Routine surveillance cystoscopy for patients with augmentation and substitution cystoplasty for benign urological conditions: is it necessary? BJU Int. 2009;104:392–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Higuchi TT, Husmann DA. The use of annual endoscopy and urine cytology for bladder tumor surveillance following enteric augmentation cystoplasty. J Urol. 2009;181(4):S403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mirkin K, Casey JT, Mukherjee S, et al. Risk of bladder cancer in patients with spina bifida: case reports and review of the literature. J Pediatr Rehabil Med. 2013;6(3):155–62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Vajda P, Buyukunal C, Soylet Y, et al. A therapeutic method for failed bladder augmentation in children: re-augmentation. BJU Int. 2006;97:816–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Pope JC, Keating MA, Casale AJ, et al. Augmenting the augmented bladder: treatment of the contractile bowel segment. J Urol. 1998;160:854–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. McLaughlin KP, Rink RC, Adams MC, et al. Stomach in combination with other intestinal segments in pediatric lower urinary tract reconstruction. J Urol. 1995;154:1162–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Quek ML, Ginsberg DA. Long-term urodynamics followup of bladder augmentation for neurogenic bladder. J Urol. 2003;169(1):195–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kielb SJ – Author correspondence (8/2/15).

  29. Redshaw JD, Elliot SP, Rosenstein DI, et al. Procedures needed to maintain functionality of adult continent catheterizable channels: a comparison of continent cutaneous ileal cecocystoplasty with tunneled catheterizable channels. J Urol. 2014;192:821–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Khavari R, Fletcher SG, Liu J, et al. A modification to augmentation cystoplasty with catheterizable stoma for neurogenic patients: technique and long-term results. Urology. 2012;80:460–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Pereira LP, Ariba IS, Urrutia MJM, et al. Artificial urinary sphincter: 11-year experience in adolescents with congenital neuropathic bladder. Eur Urol. 2006;50:1096–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Henry GD, Graham SM, Cornell RJ. A multicenter study on the perineal versus penoscrotal approach for implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter: cuff size and control of male stress urinary incontinence. J Urol. 2009;182:2404–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Shen Y, Chiang P. The experience of artificial urinary sphincter implantation by a single surgeon in 15 years. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2013;29:157–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Rasmussen NT, Guralnick ML, O’Connor RC. Successful use of sacral neuromodulation after failed bladder augmentation. Can Urol Assoc J. 2009;3(5):E49–50.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. O’Connor RC et al. Long-term results of suprapubic bladder neck closure for treatment of the devastated outlet. Urology. 2005;66(2):311–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Spahn M et al. Last resort in devastated bladder outlet: bladder neck closure and continent vesicostomy—long-term results and comparison of different techniques. Urology. 2010;75(5):1185–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Shpall AI, Ginsberg DA. Bladder neck closure with lower urinary tract reconstruction: technique and long-term followup. J Urol. 2004;172(6 Pt 1):2296–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Kavanagh A et al. Bladder neck closure in conjunction with enterocystoplasty and Mitrofanoff diversion for complex incontinence: closing the door for good. J Urol. 2012;188(4 Suppl):1561–5. The article highlights complication rates seen with bladder neck reconstruction with adjunct enterocystoplasty.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Hernandez-Martin S et al. Bladder neck closure in children: long-term results and consequences. Eur J Pediatr Surg. 2015;25(1):100–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Willis H, Safiano NA, Lloyd LK. Comparison of transvaginal and retropubic bladder neck closure with suprapubic catheter in women. J Urol. 2015;193(1):196–202.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Rovner ES et al. Transvaginal bladder neck closure with posterior urethral flap for devastated urethra. Urology. 2011;78(1):208–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Smith EA et al. Use of rectus abdominis muscle flap as adjunct to bladder neck closure in patients with neurogenic incontinence: preliminary experience. J Urol. 2010;183(4):1556–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Grimsby GM, et al. Long term outcomes of bladder neck reconstruction without augmentation cystoplasty in children. J Urol. 2015. This is an excellent review of the long term complications seen in bladder neck reconstruction without bladder augmentation.

  44. Castellan M et al. Bladder neck sling for treatment of neurogenic incontinence in children with augmentation cystoplasty: long-term followup. J Urol. 2005;173(6):2128–31. discussion 2131.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Athanasopoulos A, Gyftopoulos K, McGuire EJ. Treating stress urinary incontinence in female patients with neuropathic bladder: the value of the autologous fascia rectus sling. Int Urol Nephrol. 2012;44(5):1363–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Snodgrass WT, Elmore J, Adams R. Bladder neck sling and appendicovesicostomy without augmentation for neurogenic incontinence in children. J Urol. 2007;177(4):1510–4. discussion 1515.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Athanasopoulos A, McGuire EJ. Efficacy of the bulbourethral autologous sling in treating male stress urinary incontinence: a three-year experience from a single center. Int Urol Nephrol. 2010;42(4):921–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Snodgrass W, Barber T. Comparison of bladder outlet procedures without augmentation in children with neurogenic incontinence. J Urol. 2010;184(4 Suppl):1775–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Snodgrass W, Barber T, Cost N. Detrusor compliance changes after bladder neck sling without augmentation in children with neurogenic urinary incontinence. J Urol. 2010;183(6):2361–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Szymanski KM, Misseri R, Whittam B, et al. Long-term outcomes of catheterizable continent urinary channels: what do you use, where you put it, and does it matter? J Ped Urol. 2015;xx:1.e1–7. This article provides a comprehensive review of the long-term outcomes for various types of catheterizable channels.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Whittam BM, Misseri R, Szymanski KM, et al. A comparison of the Monti and spiral Monti procedures: a long-term analysis. J Ped Urol. 2015;11:134.e1–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Bani-Hani AH, Cain MP, Kaefer M, et al. The Malone antegrade continence enema: single institutional review. J Urol. 2008;180:1106–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Mickelson JJ, Yerkes EB, Meyer T, et al. L stent for stomal stenosis in catheterizable channels. J Urol. 2009;182:1786–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Radojicic ZI, Perovic SV, Rados DP, et al. Buccal mucosa grafts for repair of stenotic catheterizable continent stoma. J Urol. 2008;180:1767–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

None declared

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. Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA

    Brian J. Jordan & Stephanie J. Kielb

  2. John H. Stroger, Jr. Hospital of Cook County, 1900 W. Polk Street, Suite 465, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA

    Cristina Palmer

Authors
  1. Brian J. Jordan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cristina Palmer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stephanie J. Kielb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephanie J. Kielb.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Reconstructed Bladder Function & Dysfunction

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jordan, B.J., Palmer, C. & Kielb, S.J. Evaluation and Management of Failed Bladder Reconstructions. Curr Bladder Dysfunct Rep 10, 398–403 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11884-015-0334-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11884-015-0334-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation