Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The disadvantages of reflux in uretero-Ileal cutaneous anastomoses for supravesical urinary diversion

  • Published:
Urological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Radiological and histological evidence from animal studies is presented to show that renal units subjected to reflux of urine after diversionary surgery develop pyelonephritis. It is suggested that anti-reflux diversionary procedures be developed.

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

  1. Bricker, E. M.: Bladder substitution after pelvic evisceration. Surg. Clin. N. Amer. 30, 1511 (1950)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Campbell, J. E., Oliver, J. A., McKay, D. E.: Dynamics of ileal conduits. Radiology 85, 338 (1965)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Engel, R. M.: Complications of bilateral ureteroileo-cutaneous urinary diversion: A review of 208 cases. J. Urol. (Baltimore) 101, 508 (1969)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Susset, J. G., Taguchi Y, DeDomenico, I., MacKinnon, K. J.: Hydronephrosis and hydroureter in ileal conduit urinary diversion. Canad. J. Surg. 9, 141 (1966)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Minton, J. P., Kiser, W. S., Ketcham, A. S.: A study of the functional dynamics of ileal conduit urinary diversion with relationship to urinary infection. Surg. Gynec. Obstet. 119, 541 (1964)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bricker, E. M., Butcher, H. R., McAfee, C. A.: Late results of bladder substitution with isolated ileal segments. Surg. Gynec. Obstet. 99, 469 (1954)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bricker, E. M., Butcher, H. R., McAfee, C. A.: Reappraisal of eleal segment substitution for the urinary bladder. Surgery 42, 581 (1957)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Miles, G. O. and Berry, N.: Problems in the construction of an ileal bladder. Sth. med. J. (Bgham, Ala.) 56, 421 (1967)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Mount, B. M., Susset, J. G., Campbell, J., MacKinnon, K. J.: Ureteral implantation into ileal conduits. J. Urol. (Baltimore) 100, 605 (1968)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Pond, H. S., Texter, J. H.: Trigonal-ileal anastomosis in experimental studies. J. Urol. (Baltimore) 103, 746 (1970)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, The Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, The Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, 17033, Hershey, Pennsylvania, USA

    F. J. Duggan Jr., E. J. Sanford & T. J. Rohner Jr.

Authors
  1. F. J. Duggan Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. E. J. Sanford
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. T. J. Rohner Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Duggan, F.J., Sanford, E.J. & Rohner, T.J. The disadvantages of reflux in uretero-Ileal cutaneous anastomoses for supravesical urinary diversion. Urol. Res. 2, 85–90 (1974). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00554592

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00554592

Key words

Search

Navigation