Long-term effectiveness and complication rates of bladder augmentation in patients with neurogenic bladder dysfunction: A systematic review.
Hoen L'Department of Urology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Ecclestone HDepartment of Neuro-Urology, London Spinal Injuries Centre, Stanmore, United Kingdom.
Blok BFMDepartment of Urology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Karsenty GDepartment of Urology, Aix Marseille University, Marseille, France.
Phé VDepartment of Urology, Pitié-Salpêtrière Academic Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris 6 University, Paris, France.
Bossier RDepartment of Urology, Aix Marseille University, Marseille, France.
Groen JDepartment of Urology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Castro-Diaz DDepartment of Urology, Pitié-Salpêtrière Academic Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris 6 University, Paris, France.
Padilla Fernández BDepartment of Urology, Pitié-Salpêtrière Academic Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris 6 University, Paris, France.
Del Popolo GDepartment of Neuro-Urology, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.
Musco SDepartment of Neuro-Urology, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.
Pannek JNeuro-Urology, Swiss Paraplegic Center, Nottwil, Switzerland.
Kessler TMNeuro-Urology, Spinal Cord Injury Center and Research, University of Zürich, Balgrist University Hospital, Zürich, Switzerland.
Gross TDepartment of Urology, University of Bern, Inselspital, Bern, Switzerland.
Schneider MPNeuro-Urology, Spinal Cord Injury Center and Research, University of Zürich, Balgrist University Hospital, Zürich, Switzerland.
Hamid RDepartment of Neuro-Urology, London Spinal Injuries Centre, Stanmore, United Kingdom.
English
AIMS To systematically evaluate effectiveness and safety of bladder augmentation for adult neuro-urological patients.
METHODS The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement was followed for review of publications. The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane controlled trial databases and clinicaltrial.gov were searched until January 2015. No limitations were placed on date or language. Non-original articles, conference abstracts, and publications involving children and animals were excluded. Risk-of-bias and confounder assessment was performed.
RESULTS A total of 20 studies including 511 patients were eligible for inclusion. The level of evidence for the included studies was low, most level 4 studies with only one level 3 study. The data were narratively synthesized. Across all studies high risk-of bias and confounding was found. Primary outcomes were assessed in 16 of the 20 studies and showed improved quality of life and anatomical changes as well as stable renal function. The secondary outcomes were reported in 17 of the 20 studies and urodynamic parameters and continence all demonstrated improvement after bladder reconstruction. Long-term complications continued up to 10 years post-operatively, including bowel dysfunction in 15% of the patients, stone formation in 10%, five bladder perforations and one bladder cancer.
CONCLUSIONS Available studies are not plentiful and of relatively poor quality, appropriately designed prospective studies are urgently needed. Despite this, bladder augmentation appears to be a highly effective procedure at protecting the upper urinary tract and improving quality of life. However, it is associated with relatively high morbidity in both the short and long term.