Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

Title abbreviation: Adv Clin Exp Med
5-Year IF – 2.0, IF – 1.9, JCI (2024) – 0.43
Scopus CiteScore – 4.3
Q1 in SJR 2024, SJR score – 0.598, H-index: 49 (SJR)
ICV – 161.00; MNiSW – 70 pts
Initial editorial assessment and first decision within 24 h

ISSN 1899–5276 (print), ISSN 2451-2680 (online)
Periodicity – monthly

Download original text (EN)

Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

2017, vol. 26, nr 7, October, p. 1107–1112

doi: 10.17219/acem/63032

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

Continent catheterizable conduits in pediatric urology: One-center experience

Paweł Kroll1,2,3,A,B,C,D, Ewa Gajewska4,B,C, Jacek Zachwieja3,B,E, Danuta Ostalska-Nowicka5,E, Maciej Micker6,7,B, Andrzej Jankowski1,2,F

1 Department of Pediatric Surgery, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poland

2 Department of Pediatric Urology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poland

3 Neurology Unit, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poland

4 Department of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Physical Culture in Gorzów Wielkopolski, University School of Physical Education in Poznań, Poland

5 Pediatric Nephrology Department, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poland

6 Department of General and Vascular Surgery, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poland

7 Department of Angiology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poland

Abstract

Background. Clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) is a standard treatment for patients who are unable to empty the bladder. In the absence of the urethra or if catheterization through the urethra is problematic, a continent vesicostomy is used as a catheterizable conduit. The Malone procedure is an established treatment option for children with neurogenic constipation and fecal incontinence.
Objectives. The aim of the study was to report the authors’ experience with continent catheterizable conduits (CCCs) in children, to review the results and to determine the efficacy of the technique, with an emphasis on continence and the need for revision.
Material and Methods. The retrospective study involved children who underwent catheterizable conduit procedures from 2000 to 2015. Two kinds of continent stomas were performed: Mitrofanoff vesicostomies for CIC and Malone antegrade continence enemas (MACEs). The 115 patients treated included 66 girls and 49 boys. A total of 134 operations were performed; 62 were Mitrofanoff vesicostomies and 72 were Malone appendicostomies. In 19 cases, both Mitrofanoff and Malone appendicostomies were formed out of 1 appendix divided into 2 parts. In 5 children vesicocutaneous stomas were constructed using Monti’s procedure, and in 1 it was constructed from an intussuscepted ileal loop. In 27 patients Malone procedures were performed laparoscopically.
Results. The mean follow-up period was 8.6 years. There was no serious morbidity in relation to the surgery. In 9 children local wound infection was noted, and in 9 others stomal stenosis developed. Out of the 62 children with catheterizable vesicostomies, 59 were continent. The MACE procedure was successful in all 72 patients; problems with constipation and fecal incontinence were resolved in all cases. None of the laparoscopies needed conversion.
Conclusion. Continent catheterizable conduits help patients achieve both fecal and urinary continence. Laparoscopy is effective in performing the Malone procedure. Stoma-related complications could be avoided using end-to-side appendix anastomoses to the skin. Stomal incontinence is rare even when a simplified technique is employed, using the appendix without cecoplication.

Key words

surgery, urinary incontinence, child, neurogenic bladder, fecal incontinence

References (25)

  1. Verpoorten C, Buyse GM. The neurogenic bladder: Medical treatment. Pediatr Nephrol. 2008;23:717–725.
  2. Panicker JN, Fowler CJ, Kessler TM. Lower urinary tract dysfunction in the neurological patient: Clinical assessment and management. Lancet Neurol. 2015;14:720–732.
  3. Fowler CJ, Griffiths D, de Groat WC. The neural control of micturition. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2008;9:453–466.
  4. Lapides J, Diokno AC, Silber SJ, Lowe BS. Clean intermittent self-catheterization in the treatment of urinary tract disease. J Urol. 1972;107:458–461.
  5. Süzer O, Vates TS, Freedman AL, Smith CA, Gonzalez R. Results of the Mitrofanoff procedure in urinary tract reconstruction in children. Br J Urol. 1997;79:279–282.
  6. Gerharz EW, Tassadaq T, Pickard RS, Shah PJ, Woodhouse CR, Ransley PG. Transverse retubularized ileum: Early clinical experience with a new second line Mitrofanoff tube. J Urol. 1998;159:525–528.
  7. Singh G, Thomas DG. Intermittent catheterization following enterocystoplasty. Br J Urol. 1995;76:175–178.
  8. González R, Ludwikowski BM. Alternatives to conventional enterocystoplasty in children: A critical review of urodynamic outcomes. Front Pediatr. 2013;1:1–9.
  9. Malone PS, Ransley PG, Keily EM. Preliminary report: The antegrade continence enema. Lancet. 1990;336:1217–1218.
  10. Griffiths DM, Malone PS. The Malone antegrade continence enema. J Pediatr Surg. 1995;30:68–71.
  11. Wimpissinger TF, Gerharz EW, Malone PS. Chirurgische Therapie der Stuhl-Überlaufinkontinenz: Vorgehensweise nach der Malone-antegrade-continence-enema-Technik. Dtsch Arztebl. 2002;43:2279–2283.
  12. VanderBrink BA, Cain MP, Kaefer M, Meldrum K, Misseri R, Rink RC. Split-appendix technique for simultaneous appendicovesicostomy and appendicocecostomy. J Pediatr Surg. 2011;46:259–262.
  13. Bani-Hani AH, Cain MP, Kaefer M, et al. The Malone antegrade continence enema: Single institutional review. J Urol. 2008;180:1106–1110.
  14. Clark T, Pope JC IV, Adams MC, Wells N, Brock JW III. Factors that influence outcomes of the Mitrofanoff and Malone antegrade continence enema reconstructive procedures in children. J Urol. 2002;168:1537–1540.
  15. Farrugia MK, Malone PS. Educational article: The Mitrofanoff procedure. J Pediatr Urol. 2010;6:330–337.
  16. Castellan MA, Gosalbez R, Labbie A, Ibrahim E, DiSandro M. Outcomes of continent catheterizable stomas for urinary and fecal incontinence: Comparison among different tissue options. BJU Int. 2005;95:1053–1057.
  17. McAndrew HF, Malone PS. Continent catheterizable conduits: Which stoma, which conduit and which reservoir? BJU Int. 2002;89:86–89.
  18. Mikulicz J. Zur operation der augeborenen blasenspalte. Zentralblatt f. Chirurgie. 1899;26:641–643.
  19. Sinha CK, Butler C, Haddad M. Left antegrade continent enema (LACE): Review of the literature. Eur J Pediatr Surg. 2008;18:215–218.
  20. Lynch AC, Beasley SW, Robertson RW, Morreau PN. Comparison of results of laparoscopic and open antegrade continence enema procedures. Pediatr Surg Int. 1999;15:343–346.
  21. Lawal TA, Rangel SJ, Bischoff A, Peña A, Levitt MA. Laparoscopic-assisted Malone appendicostomy in the management of fecal incontinence in children. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2011;21:455–459.
  22. Van Savage JG, Yohannes P. Laparoscopic antegrade continence enema in situ appendix procedure for refractory constipation and overflow fecal incontinence in children with spina bifida. J Urol. 2000;164:1084–1087.
  23. Curry JI, Osborne A, Malone PS. How to achieve a successful Malone antegrade continence enema. J Pediatr Surg. 1998;33:138–141.
  24. Narayanaswamy B, Wilcox DT, Cuckow PM, Duffy PG, Ransley PG. The Yang-Monti ileovesicostomy: A problematic channel? BJU Int. 2001;87:861–865.
  25. Lemelle JL, Simo AK, Schmitt M. Comparative study of the Yang-Monti channel and appendix for continent diversion in the Mitrofanoff and Malone principles. J Urol. 2004;172:1907–1910.
© Wroclaw Medical University