Failed exstrophy closure
Children with bladder exstrophy present a formidable surgical challenge. Like all major reconstructive surgeries, the best hope for a favorable outcome lies in achieving success in the first operative attempt. Regardless of the surgical approach, however, complications do occur. A failed exstrophy c...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Seminars in pediatric surgery 2011-05, Vol.20 (2), p.97-101 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Children with bladder exstrophy present a formidable surgical challenge. Like all major reconstructive surgeries, the best hope for a favorable outcome lies in achieving success in the first operative attempt. Regardless of the surgical approach, however, complications do occur. A failed exstrophy closure is a major complication with significant implications on the long-term surgical outcome and ultimate fate of the urinary tract. Successful repeat exstrophy closure can be accomplished in most cases when performed in conjunction with pelvic osteotomy and proper postoperative immobilization. Modern staged repair of exstrophy, complete primary repair of exstrophy, and immediate continent urinary diversion have been advocated by different groups in the management of a failed exstrophy closure. It is apparent that compared with children who undergo successful primary closure, a failed closure with subsequent successful repeat closure makes the child much less likely to achieve sufficient bladder growth to be considered for bladder neck reconstruction, and furthermore, makes them less likely to have a successful bladder neck reconstruction even when they are an acceptable candidate. Although acceptable dryness rates after repeat closure can ultimately be obtained, they are typically at the expense of a commitment to intermittent catheterization and continent diversion. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1055-8586 1532-9453 |
DOI: | 10.1053/j.sempedsurg.2010.12.004 |