Volume 35, Issue 4 pp. 497-502
Clinical Article

Retropubic bulbourethral sling in incontinence post-exstrophy repair: 2-year minimal follow up of a salvage procedure

Bassem S. Wadie

Corresponding Author

Bassem S. Wadie

Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt

Correspondence to: Bassem S. Wadie, MSc, M.D., Voiding Dysfunction Unit, Urology & Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura 35516, Egypt. E-mail: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
Tamer E. Helmy

Tamer E. Helmy

Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt

Search for more papers by this author
Mohamed E. Dawaba

Mohamed E. Dawaba

Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt

Search for more papers by this author
Mohamed A. Ghoneim
First published: 07 February 2015
Citations: 1
Eric Rovner led the peer-review process as the Associate Editor responsible for the paper.
Potential conflicts of interest: Nothing to disclose.

Abstract

Aims

Post-exstrophy incontinence is a challenge because continence is difficult to achieve and more difficult to maintain. Feasibility and outcomes of a bulbourethral sling to treat post-exstrophy incontinence is shown in this report.

Methods

A retropubic bulbourethral sling was applied to male patients with incontinence post-exstrophy-epispadius repair. The study included children with total (continuous) incontinence who underwent multiple previous anti-incontinence procedures, ranging from bladder neck injection to bladder neck reconstruction. Preoperative assessment includes urinalysis, renal US, VCUG, 1-hr pad test and urodynamics. The bulbourethral sling applied is made of polypropylene and is suspended by 4 pairs of nylon sutures, to support the bulbar urethra within its covering muscles with the sutures tied on the rectus muscles. Continence was evaluated as well as adverse events.

Results

Seventeen children, (median age 8.7 years) completed 24-month of follow up. All had CPRE. Five children (29.27%) were dry. Four micturated through the urethra and one by catheterizing his cutaneous stoma every 3–4 hr. In none, PVR exceeded 10% of expected capacity. Four children underwent re-tightening 1–4 weeks after removal of urethral catheter. Perineal wound dehiscence occurred in one, perineal/suprapubic pain in seven and epididymo-orchitis in one child.

Conclusion

The current technique is promising for difficult cases of incontinence after CPRE. It is safe, as no serious adverse events occurred during follow up period. It is economic and re-tightening is easy to perform. Neurourol. Urodynam. 35:497–502, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.