Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading  Processing Request

Morbidity associated with operative management of bladder stones in spinal cord-injured patients.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
  • Additional Information
    • Subject Terms:
    • Abstract:
      Study design:Retrospective cohort study of spinal cord-injured (SCI) patients undergoing bladder stone removal operations between 1999 and 2013.Objectives:To determine the morbidity associated with different operative management of bladder stones in SCI patients.Setting:National Spinal Injuries Unit, Stoke Mandeville Hospital, UK.Methods:Data on age, sex, level and Frankel classification of spinal cord injury, method of bladder drainage, method of bladder stone removal, complications and length of stay were collected from patient records. Complication was defined as bladder perforation, sepsis or persistent haematuria. Predictors of complications and length of stay were determined using univariate and multivariate regression analyses.Results:Overall, 112 consecutive bladder stone removal operations were performed, one open cystolithotomy and 111 transurethral procedures utilising simple washout, stone punch or electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL). Of these procedures, 17% (19/112) had complications; 0/11 (0%) following washout, 5/44 (11%) after stone punch, 3/12 (25%) following EHL and 10/26 (38%) after combined procedures using stone punch and EHL. In a multivariate model, patients with a cervical-level injury and those undergoing a combined procedure were significantly more likely to have a complication (P=0.032 and P=0.046). Length of stay was longer following a complication, the mean was 4.18 days compared with 1.37 days without a complication (P<0.001). Controlling complications and age, use of a combined procedure was associated with significantly longer stay than use of stone punch alone.Conclusion:This study provides important outcome data that should guide operative procedure choice and inform patients about possible risks during consent. It sets a benchmark that other centres can evaluate their outcomes against. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
    • Abstract:
      Copyright of Spinal Cord is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)