Bladder Exstrophy Reconstruction Without Osteotomy; Evaluation of 50 Cases

Year 2025, Volume: 4 Issue: 1, 10 - 14, 27.03.2025

Süleyman Tağcı , Gökhan Demirtaş , Bilge Karabulut , Tuğrul Tiryaki

Abstract

Introductıon: To evaluate the outcome of our patients who underwent BE (bladder exstrophy)repair without osteotomy and to determine whether they are continent, upper urinary system functions, and complication rates.
Methods: The data of 50 patients who applied to our clinic due to bladder exstrophy between 2010 and 2022 were analyzed retrospectively. The gender of the patients, the age of the operation, the surgical interventions, the complications detected, whether they were continent or not, and their upper urinary system functions were recorded.
Results: The data of the 50 patients diagnosed with classical bladder exstrophy were evaluated and included in the study. Nine of these patients were female, and 41 were male. The patients’ mean age was 71.2 months(6-264 months). The mean follow-up period was determined to be 70.8 months. Bladder closure was performed in 13 of 50 patients, bladder closure + bladder neck repair + epispadias repair was performed in 29 patients, and augmentation was performed for eight patients. Augmentation was recommended for five patients in the follow-up, but patients did not accept it. Skin dehiscence occurred in 2 patients, and a primary suture was performed for them. Three patients were reoperated for bladder dehiscence. During the follow-ups, cystolithotripsy was performed in 3 patients,and csytolitotomy was performed in 2 patients. Bladder dehiscence developed in 1 patient after csytolitotomy, and he was operated on.25 of the 50 patients included in the study were under five years of age. The continence status of the remaining 25 patients was evaluated. Fifteen (60%) of 25 patients were found to be continent.
Conclusion: Although strong advocates of bladder exstrophy repair with osteotomy exist, we recommend repair without osteotomy as an easy-to-apply and low-complication approach.

Keywords

Bladder Exstrophy, Osteotomy, Urinary incontinence

References

• 1. Buyukunal CS, Gearhart JP (2011). A short history of bladder exstrophy. Semin Pediatr Surg 20(2):62-5
• 2. Siffel C, Correa A, Amar E, et al. (2011). Bladder exstrophy: an epidemiologic study from the International Clearinghouse for Birth Defects Surveillance and Research, and an overview of the literature. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet 15;157C(4):321-32
• 3. Ebert AK, Reutter H, Ludwig M, et al (2009) The exstrophy-epispadias complex. Orphanet J Rare Dis 30;4:23
• 4. Mitchell ME (2005). Bladder exstrophy repair: complete primary repair of exstrophy Urology 65:5–8
• 5. Baird AD, Nelson CP, Gearhart JP (2007). Modern staged repair of bladder exstrophy: a contemporary series. J Pediatr Urol 3(4):311-5
• 6. Mohan S Gundeti (2019). Surgical techniques in pediatric and adolescent urology.Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers s.269-270
• 7. Sirisreetreerux P, Lue KM, Ingviya T, et al. Failed Primary Bladder Exstrophy Closure with Osteotomy: Multivariable Analysis of a 25-Year Experience. J Urol. 2017 Apr;197(4):1138-1143.
• 8. JS Ellison, M Shnorhavorian, K Willihnganz-Lawson, et al. (2016). A critical appraisal of continence in bladder exstrophy: long-term outcomes of the complete primary repair. J Pediatr Urol12(4):205.e1-7
• 9. Lloyd JC, Spano SM, Ross SS, et al. How dry is dry? A review of definitions of continence in the contemporary exstrophy/epispadias literature. J Urol. 2012;188:1900–4.
• 10. Diamond DA, Jeffs RD. Cloacal exstrophy: a 22-year experience. J Urol. 1985;133(5):779–782.
• 11. Trendelenberg F (1906). The treatment of ectopia vesicae. Ann Surg 44:981–9
• 12. Woodhouse CR, Kellett MJ (1984). Anatomy of the penis and its deformities in exstrophy and epispadias. J Urol 1984; 132:1122–4.
• 13. Wild AT, Sponseller PD, Stec AA, Gearhart JP. The role of osteotomy in surgical repair of bladder exstrophy. Semin Pediatr Surg. 2011 May;20(2):71-8.
• 14. Mushtaq I, Gariboli M, Smeulders N, et al. (2014). Primary bladder exstrophy closure in neonates: challenging the traditions. J Urol 191:193–8.
• 15. Rösch WH, Promm M (2016) Blasenekstrophie: qualität der primärversorgungundlangzeitprognose. Urologe 55:53–7.
• 16. Husman DA, McLorie GA, Churchill BM (1989). Closure of the: an evaluation of the factors leading to its success and its importance on urinary incontinence. J Urol 142:522–4.
• 17. Kertai MA, Rösch WH, Brandl R, et al. (2016). Morphological and Functional Hip long-term results after exstrophy repair. Eur J Pediatr Surg 26:508–13.
• 18. Özcan C, Ulman I, Kara S, et al (2000). Clinical results with anterior diagonal iliac osteotomy in bladder exstrophy. J Urol 163: 1932, 2000
• 19. Woodhouse CR, North AC, Gearhart JP (2006). Standing the test of time: long-term outcome of reconstruction of the exstrophy bladder. World J Urol 24:244–9.
• 20. Silver RI, Yang A, Ben-Chaim J, et al. (1997). Penile length in adulthood after exstrophy reconstruction. J Urol 157:999–1003.
• 21. Gearhart JP, Leonard MP, Burgers JK, et al. (1992). The Cantwell Ransley technique for repair of epispadias. J Urol 148:851–4.
• 22. Benz KS, Dunn E, Solaiyappan M, et al (2018). Novel observations of female genital anatomy in classic bladder exstrophy using 3-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging reconstruction. J Urol 200:882–9.
• 23. Castagnetti M, Gigante C, Perrone G, et al. (2008). Comparison of musculoskeletal and urological functional outcomes in patients with bladder exstrophy undergoing repair with and without osteotomy. Pediatr SurgInt 24:689–93.
• 24. Haffar A, Hirsch AM, Morrill CC, Crigger CC, Sponseller PD, Gearhart JP. Classic Bladder Exstrophy Closure Without Osteotomy or Immobilization: An Exercise in Futility? Urology. 2023 Nov;181:128-132.
• 25. Preeya Khandge, Wayland J Wu, Saran A Hall (2021).Osteotomy in the newborn classic bladder exstrophy patient: A comparative study. J Pediatr Urol 17(4):482.e1-482.e6.
• 26. Hofmann A, Haider M, Promm M, et al (2021). Delayed primary closure of bladder exstrophy without osteotomy: 12 year experience in a safe and gentle alternative to neonatal surgery. J Pediatr Surg 57(10):303-308.