Abstract
Objective To analyze the outcomes of failed classic bladder exstrophy (CBE) reclosure with and without pelvic osteotomy. Each failed CBE closure decreases the chance of eventual continence. To minimize secondary failures, most institutions use pelvic osteotomy with reclosure. Reclosure with and without osteotomy can still fail. Methods An institutional database of 1210 exstrophy-epispadias complex patients was reviewed for CBE patients who had 2 prior failed closures with the third closure at the authors' institution. Patient demographics, closure history, diastasis distance, bladder capacity, and outcomes were examined by chi-square tests comparing osteotomy status with first reclosure. Results Of 848 CBE patients, 17 met inclusion criteria: 12 with osteotomy at reclosure (group 1) and 5 without (group 2). Median time between initial closure and reclosure in the 2 groups were 6.5 months (range, 0-42 months) and 3 months (range, 0-59 months), respectively. There was no significant difference in the rate of attaining sufficient bladder capacity for bladder neck reconstruction (BNR; 100 cc) between groups 1 and 2 (42% vs 40%; P =.490). Within group 1, patients receiving proper immobilization with external fixation (n = 5) demonstrated a significantly greater rate of attaining sufficient bladder capacity for BNR compared with patients who did not (80% vs14%; P =.023). There were no differences in the rates of attaining dryness per urethra. Conclusion CBE outcomes worsen with each successive failed closure. Reclosure should be performed with osteotomy and proper immobilization to maximize the chance of sufficient capacity for BNR or augmentation cystoplasty.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Article number | 19057 |
| Pages (from-to) | 1179-1182 |
| Number of pages | 4 |
| Journal | Urology |
| Volume | 85 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - May 1 2015 |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Urology
- Medicine(all)
Cite this
Secondary Reclosure in Classic Bladder Exstrophy : Challenges and Outcomes. / Inouye, Brian M.; DiCarlo, Heather; Young, Ezekiel E.; Tourchi, Ali; Gearhart, John Phillip.
In: Urology, Vol. 85, No. 5, 19057, 01.05.2015, p. 1179-1182.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Secondary Reclosure in Classic Bladder Exstrophy
T2 - Challenges and Outcomes
AU - Inouye, Brian M.
AU - DiCarlo, Heather
AU - Young, Ezekiel E.
AU - Tourchi, Ali
AU - Gearhart, John Phillip
PY - 2015/5/1
Y1 - 2015/5/1
N2 - Objective To analyze the outcomes of failed classic bladder exstrophy (CBE) reclosure with and without pelvic osteotomy. Each failed CBE closure decreases the chance of eventual continence. To minimize secondary failures, most institutions use pelvic osteotomy with reclosure. Reclosure with and without osteotomy can still fail. Methods An institutional database of 1210 exstrophy-epispadias complex patients was reviewed for CBE patients who had 2 prior failed closures with the third closure at the authors' institution. Patient demographics, closure history, diastasis distance, bladder capacity, and outcomes were examined by chi-square tests comparing osteotomy status with first reclosure. Results Of 848 CBE patients, 17 met inclusion criteria: 12 with osteotomy at reclosure (group 1) and 5 without (group 2). Median time between initial closure and reclosure in the 2 groups were 6.5 months (range, 0-42 months) and 3 months (range, 0-59 months), respectively. There was no significant difference in the rate of attaining sufficient bladder capacity for bladder neck reconstruction (BNR; 100 cc) between groups 1 and 2 (42% vs 40%; P =.490). Within group 1, patients receiving proper immobilization with external fixation (n = 5) demonstrated a significantly greater rate of attaining sufficient bladder capacity for BNR compared with patients who did not (80% vs14%; P =.023). There were no differences in the rates of attaining dryness per urethra. Conclusion CBE outcomes worsen with each successive failed closure. Reclosure should be performed with osteotomy and proper immobilization to maximize the chance of sufficient capacity for BNR or augmentation cystoplasty.
AB - Objective To analyze the outcomes of failed classic bladder exstrophy (CBE) reclosure with and without pelvic osteotomy. Each failed CBE closure decreases the chance of eventual continence. To minimize secondary failures, most institutions use pelvic osteotomy with reclosure. Reclosure with and without osteotomy can still fail. Methods An institutional database of 1210 exstrophy-epispadias complex patients was reviewed for CBE patients who had 2 prior failed closures with the third closure at the authors' institution. Patient demographics, closure history, diastasis distance, bladder capacity, and outcomes were examined by chi-square tests comparing osteotomy status with first reclosure. Results Of 848 CBE patients, 17 met inclusion criteria: 12 with osteotomy at reclosure (group 1) and 5 without (group 2). Median time between initial closure and reclosure in the 2 groups were 6.5 months (range, 0-42 months) and 3 months (range, 0-59 months), respectively. There was no significant difference in the rate of attaining sufficient bladder capacity for bladder neck reconstruction (BNR; 100 cc) between groups 1 and 2 (42% vs 40%; P =.490). Within group 1, patients receiving proper immobilization with external fixation (n = 5) demonstrated a significantly greater rate of attaining sufficient bladder capacity for BNR compared with patients who did not (80% vs14%; P =.023). There were no differences in the rates of attaining dryness per urethra. Conclusion CBE outcomes worsen with each successive failed closure. Reclosure should be performed with osteotomy and proper immobilization to maximize the chance of sufficient capacity for BNR or augmentation cystoplasty.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84933566272&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84933566272&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.urology.2015.01.029
DO - 10.1016/j.urology.2015.01.029
M3 - Article
C2 - 25917736
AN - SCOPUS:84933566272
VL - 85
SP - 1179
EP - 1182
JO - Urology
JF - Urology
SN - 0090-4295
IS - 5
M1 - 19057
ER -