2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2008.11.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mitrofanoff continent catheterizable conduits: Top down or bottom up?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
5
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
5
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This contrasts with a previous observation by Berkowitz et al. where they showed that anteriorly placed CCSs are more prone to infection and hypothesized that ineffective bladder emptying can be contributory. In the author's experience, once the child and the parents were adherent to clean intermittent catheterization (CIC), the rate of symptomatic infection was not increased using either technique.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 94%
“…This contrasts with a previous observation by Berkowitz et al. where they showed that anteriorly placed CCSs are more prone to infection and hypothesized that ineffective bladder emptying can be contributory. In the author's experience, once the child and the parents were adherent to clean intermittent catheterization (CIC), the rate of symptomatic infection was not increased using either technique.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 94%
“…We prefer the implantation of the conduit (either Mitrofanoff or Monti) on the posterior bladder wall in order to obtain the straightest path from the abdominal wall to the bladder, favouring the complete emptying of the bladder. This choice is also supported by recent findings in the literature that would suggest that there is suboptimal bladder drainage with anterior conduits, reflected by a greater risk of UTI and bladder stone formation than there is with posterior conduits . With regard to the anti‐reflux mechanism, we adopt the Lich‐Gregoir technique, which is nowadays the ‘gold standard’ in the minimally invasive setting .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…However, others have shown no difference between the two [21]. Mitrofanoffs constructed on the posterior wall of BA, rather than the anterior walls, are thought to drain urine more efficiently and have a lower rate of UTI and stone formation [22]. The use of Mitrofanoff in the present study (all opening on the posterior wall of the BA) was not associated with an increased risk of calculi formation when compared to urethral catheterisation.…”
Section: + Modelmentioning
confidence: 47%