Comparative Urodynamics of Appendiceal and Ureteral Mitrofanoff Conduits in Children

Stephen H. Watson, Stuart B. Bauer, Craig A. Peters, James Mandell, Arnold H. Colodny, Anthony Atala, Alan B. Retik

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

36 Scopus citations

Abstract

We report the cystometric and conduit pressure profilometric findings of 20 children for whom the Mitrofanoff principle was applied to the construction of 21 continent catheterizable urinary conduits. Mitrofanoff conduits were fashioned from ureter in 10 cases, appendix in 8, ileum in 1, stomach in 1 and a combination appendix and ureter in 1. Conduit pressure profiles showed that functional profile length correlated strongly with the static profile maximal Mitrofanoff closure pressure (p = 0.04) and dynamic profile maximal Mitrofanoff closure pressure (p = 0.02). There was a statistically significant difference between clinical continence rates for children above and below the functional profile length threshold of 2.0 cm. (p = 0.05). The zone of continence corresponded to the region of the conduit intramural tunnel. Only 2 of 21 conduits were incontinent but both were constructed with ureters implanted into bowel reservoirs. Compared to appendiceal conduits, ureteral conduits had a lower functional profile length (p less than 0.01) and static profile maximal Mitrofanoff closure pressure (p less than 0.01), indicating a possible advantage to the use of the appendix.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)878-882
Number of pages5
JournalThe Journal of urology
Volume154
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1995

    Fingerprint

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Watson, S. H., Bauer, S. B., Peters, C. A., Mandell, J., Colodny, A. H., Atala, A., & Retik, A. B. (1995). Comparative Urodynamics of Appendiceal and Ureteral Mitrofanoff Conduits in Children. The Journal of urology, 154(2), 878-882. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)67193-3