Pediatric Surgery International

, Volume 11, Issue 5–6, pp 348–350 | Cite as

Vesicostomy in childhood: indications and results

  • V. Di Benedetto
  • R. Bankole Sanni
  • L. Miano
  • G. Monfort
Original Article

Abstract

The authors report their experience with 27 patients who underwent cutaneous vesicostomy (CV) diversion for either lower tract disorders or obstruction. The indications for CV included 18 cases of neurogenic bladder, 3 pseudo-prune belly syndrome, 3 bladder exstrophy, 2 vesicoureteral reflux, and 1 posterior urethral valves. A Lapides-type technique with minor changes was performed in all cases. Improvement of renal function occurred after CV in all but 3 patients (11.1%). No early surgical complications were observed. Late complications occurred in 8 patients (29.6%): 4 (14.8%) had a stomal stenosis and 4 (14.8%) urinary tract infections. The overall revision rate was 7.4%. We believe this technique is simple to perform, tubeless, easy to manage, and readly reversible. Our experience tends to confirm CV to be an easy, effective, and reversible means to treat children and infants with selected pathology of the lower urinary tract. Results and complications are discussed.

Key words

Cutaneous vesicostomy Urinary tract infection Neurogenic bladder Renal function 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Adzick NS, Harrisson MR, Glick PL, Delorimier AA (1986) Temporary cutaneous umbilical vesicostomy in premature infants with urethral obstruction. J Pediatr Surg 21: 1712–1715Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allen TD (1980) Vesicostomy for the temporary diversion of the urine in small children. J Urol 123: 929–931PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bauer AB, Colodny AH, Retik AB (1982) The management of vesicoureteral reflux in children with myelodysplasia. J Urol 128: 102–105PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blocksom BH Jr (1957) Bladder pouch for prolonged tubuless cystostomy. J Urol 78: 398–403PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bruce RR, Gonzales ET Jr (1980) Cutaneous vesicostomy: a useful form for temporary diversion in children. J Urol 123: 927–928PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cohen JS, Harbach LB, Kaplan GW (1978) Cutaneous vesicostomy for temporary diversion in children with neurogenic bladder dysfunction. J Urol 119: 120–124PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hurwitz RS, Ehrlich RM (1983) Complications of cutaneous vesicostomy in children. In: Ehrlich RM (ed) The Urologic Clinics of North America vol. 10 N° 3. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 503–508Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Krahn CG, Johnson HW (1993) Cutaneous vesicostomy in the young child: indications and results. Urology 41: 558–563PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ireland GW, Geist RW (1970) Difficulties with vesicostomies in 19 children with myelomeningocele. J Urol 103: 341–345PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lapides J, Ajemian EP, Lichtwardt JR (1960) Cutaneous vesicostomy. J Urol 84: 609–613PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Noe HN, Jerkins GR (1985) Cutaneous vesicostomy: experience in infants and children. J Urol 134: 301–303PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Snyder HM, Kalichman MA, Charney E, Duckett JW (1983) Vesicostomy for neurogenic bladder with spina bifida: follow-up. J Urol 130: 724–728PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. Di Benedetto
    • 1
  • R. Bankole Sanni
    • 2
  • L. Miano
    • 1
  • G. Monfort
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Pediatric SurgeryCatania UniversityCataniaItaly
  2. 2.Department of Paediatric UrologyTimone Children HospitalMarseilleFrance

Personalised recommendations