Kim Y H, Horowitz M, Combs A, Nitti V W, Libretti D, Glassberg K I
Department of Urology, State University of New York Health Science Center at Brooklyn, USA.
J Urol. 1996 Aug;156(2 Pt 2):673-6. doi: 10.1097/00005392-199608001-00028.
There is little known about the effect of urinary diversion on the bladder of children with posterior urethral valves. There is a fear that diversion may result in contracted noncompliant bladders. We wished to compare urodynamic parameters in patients who underwent primary ablation of posterior urethral valves and in those who underwent diversion in the form of vesicostomy or pyelostomy.
Urodynamics were done in 32 boys with a history of posterior urethral valves divided into 3 groups based on initial treatment: 1) transurethral valve ablation; 2) cutaneous vesicostomy, subsequent closure and valve ablation, and 3) proximal cutaneous pyelostomy, subsequent reconstitution and valve ablation.
Patients who underwent initial diversion with vesicostomy or pyelostomy had bladders with larger functional capacity, better compliance and less instability. Chronic renal failure developed in 25% of the patients who underwent primary valve ablation and 33% of those who underwent diversion. Average period of diversion in vesicostomy and pyelostomy patients was 25 months.
Based on our findings temporary diversion does not seem to damage bladders. On the contrary, placing a damaged bladder at rest may help to improve bladder function. Bladder function following reconstitution correlated poorly with ultimate outcome and progression to renal failure. While we do not recommend temporary diversion as the treatment of choice for patients with posterior urethral valves, we believe that when chosen as treatment, it can be safely performed with little risk of further damage to the bladder.
关于尿流改道对后尿道瓣膜患儿膀胱的影响,目前所知甚少。有人担心尿流改道可能导致膀胱挛缩且顺应性差。我们希望比较接受后尿道瓣膜一期消融的患者与接受膀胱造瘘术或肾盂造瘘术形式的尿流改道的患者的尿动力学参数。
对32名有后尿道瓣膜病史的男孩进行尿动力学检查,根据初始治疗将其分为3组:1)经尿道瓣膜消融术;2)皮肤膀胱造瘘术,随后关闭并进行瓣膜消融术;3)近端皮肤肾盂造瘘术,随后进行重建并进行瓣膜消融术。
最初接受膀胱造瘘术或肾盂造瘘术尿流改道的患者,其膀胱具有更大的功能容量、更好的顺应性且不稳定性更低。接受一期瓣膜消融术的患者中有25%发生慢性肾衰竭,接受尿流改道的患者中有33%发生慢性肾衰竭。膀胱造瘘术和肾盂造瘘术患者的平均尿流改道时间为25个月。
根据我们的研究结果,临时尿流改道似乎不会损害膀胱。相反,让受损的膀胱得到休息可能有助于改善膀胱功能。重建后的膀胱功能与最终结局及肾衰竭进展的相关性较差。虽然我们不推荐将临时尿流改道作为后尿道瓣膜患者的首选治疗方法,但我们认为,当选择其作为治疗方法时,可以安全地进行,对膀胱造成进一步损害的风险很小。