Bladder augmentation: Does it predispose to prosthetic infection of simultaneously placed artificial genitourinary sphincters or in situ ventriculoperitoneal shunts?

P. D. Furness, D. F. Franzoni, Ross Decter

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective. To review previous reports and our experience in assessing the risk of prosthetic infections in patients undergoing bladder augmentation simultaneously with artificial genitourinary sphincter (AGUS) implantation, and in patients with in situ ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunts, implicated as a cause of shunt infection. Patients and methods. The literature was searched to identify the number of prosthetic infections (AGUS or VP shunt) reported in patients who have undergone bladder augmentation. Additionally, the records of 53 myelodysplastic patients at our institution who had undergone bladder augmentation were reviewed to determine the incidence of AGUS and/or VP shunt infections. An AGUS was placed in 17 of these patients, who were then divided into three groups based upon the timing of their AGUS placement relative to bladder augmentation. Of the 53 patients, 47 had an in situ VP shunt at the time of their augmentation. All patients were followed for at least 12 months. Results. The reported rate of AGUS infection at the time of simultaneous bladder augmentation was not significantly different from that when these procedures were staged. In the present series, the AGUS became infected in two patients (12%): one infection occurred in each of 10 patients undergoing simultaneous procedures (10%) and one developed in each of the seven patients undergoing staged procedures (14%). Although VP shunt infections have been reported after bladder augmentation, none of the present patients had a VP shunt infection after bladder augmentation. Conclusion. These results suggest that bladder augmentation is not associated with an increased risk of prosthetic infection in patients undergoing simultaneous placement of an artificial sphincter or in those who have an in situ VP shunt.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)25-29
Number of pages5
JournalBJU International
Volume84
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 3 1999

Fingerprint

Artificial Urinary Sphincter
Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt
Urinary Bladder
Infection

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Urology

Cite this

@article{818ffbad2476490f92931eefa2ed4c86,
title = "Bladder augmentation: Does it predispose to prosthetic infection of simultaneously placed artificial genitourinary sphincters or in situ ventriculoperitoneal shunts?",
abstract = "Objective. To review previous reports and our experience in assessing the risk of prosthetic infections in patients undergoing bladder augmentation simultaneously with artificial genitourinary sphincter (AGUS) implantation, and in patients with in situ ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunts, implicated as a cause of shunt infection. Patients and methods. The literature was searched to identify the number of prosthetic infections (AGUS or VP shunt) reported in patients who have undergone bladder augmentation. Additionally, the records of 53 myelodysplastic patients at our institution who had undergone bladder augmentation were reviewed to determine the incidence of AGUS and/or VP shunt infections. An AGUS was placed in 17 of these patients, who were then divided into three groups based upon the timing of their AGUS placement relative to bladder augmentation. Of the 53 patients, 47 had an in situ VP shunt at the time of their augmentation. All patients were followed for at least 12 months. Results. The reported rate of AGUS infection at the time of simultaneous bladder augmentation was not significantly different from that when these procedures were staged. In the present series, the AGUS became infected in two patients (12{\%}): one infection occurred in each of 10 patients undergoing simultaneous procedures (10{\%}) and one developed in each of the seven patients undergoing staged procedures (14{\%}). Although VP shunt infections have been reported after bladder augmentation, none of the present patients had a VP shunt infection after bladder augmentation. Conclusion. These results suggest that bladder augmentation is not associated with an increased risk of prosthetic infection in patients undergoing simultaneous placement of an artificial sphincter or in those who have an in situ VP shunt.",
author = "Furness, {P. D.} and Franzoni, {D. F.} and Ross Decter",
year = "1999",
month = "8",
day = "3",
doi = "10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.00124.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "84",
pages = "25--29",
journal = "BJU International",
issn = "1464-4096",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bladder augmentation

T2 - Does it predispose to prosthetic infection of simultaneously placed artificial genitourinary sphincters or in situ ventriculoperitoneal shunts?

AU - Furness, P. D.

AU - Franzoni, D. F.

AU - Decter, Ross

PY - 1999/8/3

Y1 - 1999/8/3

N2 - Objective. To review previous reports and our experience in assessing the risk of prosthetic infections in patients undergoing bladder augmentation simultaneously with artificial genitourinary sphincter (AGUS) implantation, and in patients with in situ ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunts, implicated as a cause of shunt infection. Patients and methods. The literature was searched to identify the number of prosthetic infections (AGUS or VP shunt) reported in patients who have undergone bladder augmentation. Additionally, the records of 53 myelodysplastic patients at our institution who had undergone bladder augmentation were reviewed to determine the incidence of AGUS and/or VP shunt infections. An AGUS was placed in 17 of these patients, who were then divided into three groups based upon the timing of their AGUS placement relative to bladder augmentation. Of the 53 patients, 47 had an in situ VP shunt at the time of their augmentation. All patients were followed for at least 12 months. Results. The reported rate of AGUS infection at the time of simultaneous bladder augmentation was not significantly different from that when these procedures were staged. In the present series, the AGUS became infected in two patients (12%): one infection occurred in each of 10 patients undergoing simultaneous procedures (10%) and one developed in each of the seven patients undergoing staged procedures (14%). Although VP shunt infections have been reported after bladder augmentation, none of the present patients had a VP shunt infection after bladder augmentation. Conclusion. These results suggest that bladder augmentation is not associated with an increased risk of prosthetic infection in patients undergoing simultaneous placement of an artificial sphincter or in those who have an in situ VP shunt.

AB - Objective. To review previous reports and our experience in assessing the risk of prosthetic infections in patients undergoing bladder augmentation simultaneously with artificial genitourinary sphincter (AGUS) implantation, and in patients with in situ ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunts, implicated as a cause of shunt infection. Patients and methods. The literature was searched to identify the number of prosthetic infections (AGUS or VP shunt) reported in patients who have undergone bladder augmentation. Additionally, the records of 53 myelodysplastic patients at our institution who had undergone bladder augmentation were reviewed to determine the incidence of AGUS and/or VP shunt infections. An AGUS was placed in 17 of these patients, who were then divided into three groups based upon the timing of their AGUS placement relative to bladder augmentation. Of the 53 patients, 47 had an in situ VP shunt at the time of their augmentation. All patients were followed for at least 12 months. Results. The reported rate of AGUS infection at the time of simultaneous bladder augmentation was not significantly different from that when these procedures were staged. In the present series, the AGUS became infected in two patients (12%): one infection occurred in each of 10 patients undergoing simultaneous procedures (10%) and one developed in each of the seven patients undergoing staged procedures (14%). Although VP shunt infections have been reported after bladder augmentation, none of the present patients had a VP shunt infection after bladder augmentation. Conclusion. These results suggest that bladder augmentation is not associated with an increased risk of prosthetic infection in patients undergoing simultaneous placement of an artificial sphincter or in those who have an in situ VP shunt.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032782999&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032782999&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.00124.x

DO - 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.00124.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 10444119

AN - SCOPUS:0032782999

VL - 84

SP - 25

EP - 29

JO - BJU International

JF - BJU International

SN - 1464-4096

IS - 1

ER -