Evidence Hub

Update on Continent Catheterizable Channels and the Timing of their Complications

Jacobson DL, Thomas JC, Pope J, Tanaka ST, Clayton DB, Brock JW, Adams MC

The Journal of urology, 2017

81 participants

Abstract

PURPOSE: We previously reported catheterizable channel associated outcomes and concluded that the incidence of postoperative complications was greatest in the first 2 years after surgery. At that time our followup was short. In this series we sought to determine whether complications continued to accumulate with longer followup in an updated cohort of patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: We comprehensively reviewed the outcomes in 81 consecutive patients who underwent construction of a MACE (Malone antegrade continence enema) and/or a Mitrofanoff channel in association with complex genitourinary reconstruction. Mean followup was 80.1 months. Outcomes of these 119 stomas were classified by Clavien-Dindo grade and time to complication.

RESULTS: The 48 unique, channel related events (40.3%) necessitated a total of 70 interventions with a mean 24.2 months to the first event. Difficult catheterization was the most common event, occurring in 20.1% of channels an average of 29.9 months after surgery. Stomal stenosis was also common, developing in 12.6% of channels at an average of 19.9 months after surgery. Unique complications clustered in the first 2 years, after which there was a statistically significant decline (p = 0.0013). High grade complications similarly clustered (p <0.0001). Channel composition was significantly associated with rates of difficult catheterization events.

CONCLUSIONS: Compared to our previous cohort of patients with similar volume but shorter followup, our…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 81 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free