Quality of Life Survey of Urinary Diversion Patients: Comparison of Continent Urinary Diversion Versus Ileal Conduit

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Continent urinary reservoirs (CUR) have become one of the major options for patients requiring urinary diversion to improve their quality of life (QOL). To assess whether CUR enhanced postoperative QOL, we surveyed patients with CUR and ileal conduit (IC) using a questionnaire sent by mail. The questionnaire consisted of 133 questions that covered physical and mental status, social life, sexual habits and symptoms related to urinary diversions. A total of 172 questionnaires were sent out, and 137 (80%) patients (74 CUR and 63 IC patients) responded. Basic physical conditions were similar in the 2 groups, except for sleeping habits. Regarding social life, however, the CUR group showed better scores in bathing habits and frequency of overnight travel. Parastomal dermatitis was more frequent in the IC group and the patients were more hesitant to show their stoma to others. On the other hand, about half of the patients in the CUR group complained of troublesomeness in self-catheterization, especially at night. Overall, 74% and 41% of the patients in the CUR and IC group were satisfied with their urinary diversion. When the Kock pouch and Indiana pouch were compared, no statistically significant differences were found in average capacity, maximum capacity, or frequency of self-catheterization. CUR recipients have enhanced QOL regarding the stoma, travel and sleeping habits as compared to ileal conduit. However, troublesomeness of night time self-catheterization was noted in the CUR group. Individualized selection of the type of urinary diversion with informed consent is essential.