You are here

OGMENTASYON YAPILAN MESANELERDE RENAL TRANSPLANTASYON : HACETEPE DENEYÎMÎ

RENAL TRANSPLANTATION AFTER BLADDER AUGMENTATION: HACETEPE EXPERIENCE

Journal Name:

Publication Year:

Keywords (Original Language):

Abstract (2. Language): 
Today still there remains some questions about renal transplantation to the ones who had bladder aug¬mentation due to improper bladder dynamics. From a lot of centers the reports with small numbers and short follow up periods are reported. Here we share our ex¬perience about the transplantation patients whose bladders were augmented. Between November 1975and October2002, 43pedi-atric renal transplantations were performed. 3 of these had previous augmentation cystoplasty and the compliance and the capacity of the bladders were increased and transplantations were done from cadaver. Mean follow up time was 17 months (8-24 months). All the patients underwent augmentation cystoplasty before end stage renal disease period. Those patients were undertaken only immunosuppres-sive treatment. The achieved capacity after augmenta¬tion was 100 % (90-110 %) of expected capacity for age. Achieved compliance at capacity more than 7,6 times (5-10) of preaugmentation compliance. Those patients underwent cadaver renal transplantation mean of 47 months (24-60 months) after augmentation cysto-plasty. Two of those patients did clean intermittent cathaterization (CIC) 3-6X1 times a day and last one no need of CIC. Those transplanted kidneys were func¬tioning properly with mean creatinin rate of 0,8 mg/dl (0,7-0,9 mg/dl). No surgical complications were ob¬served in any of the cases. Although the case number is limited, with appro¬priate drainage of augmented bladders, the trans¬planted kidney is not affected. No infection was en¬countered due to CIC and no metabolic abnormality was observed. As a result in the cases which bladder dynamics are impaired augmentation and transplanta¬tion together increase the quality of life.
Abstract (Original Language): 
Günümüzde mesane dinamiği bozuk olduğu için ogmentasyon yapılmış olgularda böbrek transplantasyonu giderek yaygınlaşan bir uygulama olmasına rağmen literatürde az sayıda olgu ve kısa takip süresine dayanan raporlar bildirilmektedir. Bu çalışmamızda ogmentasyon sonrası transplantasyon yapılmış olgulardaki deneyimimizi paylaşmayı amaçladık. Merkezimizde Kasım 1975 - Ekim 2002 tarihleri arasında 43 pediatrik olguya renal transplantasyon yapılmıştır. Bunlardan mesane dinamiği bozuk 3 olguya önceden ogmentasyon sistoplasti yapılarak mesanelerinin kapasite ve kompliansı düzeltilmiş, daha sonra kadavradan renal transplantasyon uygulanmıştır. Takip süresi ortalama 17 ay (8-24). Bütün ogmentasyonlar olgular dialize girmeden önce gerçekleştrilmiştir. Olgulardan hiçbirine immünosupresif tedavi dışı bir tedavi verilmedi. Ogmentasyon sonrası kazanılan kapasite tahmini mesane kapasitesinin ortalama % 100 (90-110) dür. Ogmentasyon sonrası kapasitedeki kompliansın ogmentasyon öncesi sonuçlarına oranı ortalama 7,6 (5-10) dur. Ogmentasyon sonrası transplantasyona kadar geçen süre ortalama 47 ay (24-60 ay) dır. Olgulardan ikisi "Mitrofanoff" lanndan 3-6 XI arayla Temiz aralıklı kateterizasyon (TAK) yaparken bir olgu TAK a gerek duymadan üretral yoldan idrarını rezidüsüz yapabilmektedir. Üç olguda da transplante böbrekler sorunsuz olarak fonksiyon görmektedir. Ortalama kreatinin 0,8 mg/dl (0,7-0,9) dir. Hiç bir hastada cerrahi komplikasyon gözlenmedi. Ogmentasyon ve TAK ile iyi depolayan ve boşaltabilen bir mesane dinamiği sağlandığında transplante böbrek etkilenmemektedir. Olgularımızda TAK herhengi bir ek morbidite getirmemiştir. Ogmentasyon, mesane dinamiği bozuk olan olgularda da renal transplantasyonu hastaya ek bir morbidite getirmeden mümkün kılmaktadır.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
96-99

REFERENCES

References: 

1 Martin GM, Castro NS, Castello AV, Abal CV, Rodriguez SJ, Novo DJ. Enterocystoplasty and renal transplantation. J
Urol 2001; 165:393-396.
2 Sheldon CA, Gonzales R, Bums MW, Gilbert A, Buson H,
Mitchell ME. Renal transplantaion in to the dysfunctional bladder: the role of adjunctive bladder reconstruction. J Urol 1994;152:972-975.
3 Churchill
BM, Jayanti RV, Mclori GA, Khoury AE. Pediatric renal transplantation into the abnormal urinary
tract. Pediatr Nephrol 1996;10:113-120.
4 Stephenson TP, Salaman JR, Stone AR et al. Urinarytract
reconstruction before renal transplantation. Transplant Proc 1984;16: 1340-1341.
5 Koff S A. Estimating bladder capacity in children.Urology
1983;21:248-251.
6 Hatch DA. Koyle MA. Baskin SA. et al. Kidney
transplantation in children with urinary diversion or bladder
augmentation. J Urol 2001;165:2265-2268.
7 Benfield MR. McDonald R. Sullivan EK et al. The 1997
annual renal transplantation in children report of the North American Pediatric Renal Transplant Cooperative study (NAPRTCS). Pediatr Transplant 1999;3(Suppl 1): 27-32.
8 Alfrey EJ, Salvatierra O Jr, Tanney DC. et al. Bladder augmentation can be problematic with renal failure and renal transplantation. Pediatr Nephrol 1997; 11: 672-675.
9 Shokeir AA, Sharmaa M, El-Mekresh MM, El- Baz M,
Goneim MA. Late manignancy in bowel segments exposed to urine without faecal stream. Urology 1995;46:657-661.
10 Power
RE
. O'Malley KJ, Khan MS. Murphy DM, Hickey DP. Renal transplantation in patient with augmentation
cystoplasty. BJU International 2000;86:28-31.
11 Shekarriz B, Upadhyay J, Demirbilek S, Barthold JS, Gonzalez R. Surgical complications of bladder augmentation: Comparison between various enterocystoplasties in 133 patients. J Urol 2000;55:123-128.
12 Khoury JM, Timmon SL, Lorbel L, et al. Complications of
enterocystoplasty. J Urol 1992;147:38-41.
13 Mundy AR, Nurse DE,. Calcium balance, growth and skletal mineralization in patients with cystoplasties. J Urol 1992;69:257-259.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com