Urinary Diversion: the Physiological Rationale for Non-refluxing Colonic Conduits
- 1 June 1975
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in British Journal of Urology
- Vol. 47 (3) , 269-275
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410x.1975.tb03963.x
Abstract
In order to make an accurate comparison between ileal and colonic conduits, and ileal conduit was created from one kidney and a non-refluxing colonic conduit from the other kidney in 16 adult mongrel dogs. Colonic loops do not reflux, have equal resting pressures and rate of emptying when contrasted with ileal conduits, and carry a lower incidence of stomal complications. Colonic conduits respond more favourably to acute occlusion and produce a significantly lower rate of pyelonephritis at 3 months. These factors suggest that colonic conduits offer a definite advantage for long-term urinary diversion.Keywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- Comparison of Ileac and Colonic Conduit Urinary Diversions in DogsJournal of Urology, 1972
- Follow-up studies on 150 ileal conduits in childrenJournal of Pediatric Surgery, 1972
- Heal Conduit in ChildrenUrologia Internationalis, 1968
- SURVEY OF LONG-TERM RESULTS OF TOTAL URINARY DIVERSION1British Journal of Urology, 1967
- Cutaneous Ureteroileostomy in ChildrenNew England Journal of Medicine, 1967
- ROENTGENOGRAPHIC EVALUATION OF LATE RESULTS OF ILEAL LOOP URINARY DIVERSION IN INFANTS AND CHILDRENAmerican Journal of Roentgenology, 1967
- THE TREATMENT OF NEUROGENIC URINARY INCONTINENCE USING THE COLONIC CONDUIT1British Journal of Urology, 1965
- Bladder Substitution After Pelvic EviscerationSurgical Clinics of North America, 1950
- ELECTROLYTE PATTERN OF THE BLOOD AFTER BILATERAL URETEROSIGMOIDOSTOMYJAMA, 1950
- Neue Versuche über die Aufsaugung im DünndarmPflügers Archiv - European Journal of Physiology, 1894