The basic anatomical and physiological conditions needed for preparation of a good functioning urinary reservoir are analyzed according to current literature and personal experience. Owing to the need for a schematic and concise exposition, the text has been subdivided under five headings: (I) Metabolic considerations: a) the segment used; b) the duration of contact between intestinal mucosa and urine; c) the size of the exposed intestinal surface. (II) Renal function. (Ill) Physical properties of the reservoir: a) contractility; b) configuration; c) accommodation; d) viscoelasticity. (IV) Carcinogenesis: a) statistical considerations; b) ethiopathogenesis. (V) Clinical consequences of the removal of a normally functioning intestinal segment.
AdamsM.C., MitchellM.E., RinkR.C.: Gastrocytoplasty: an alternative solution to the problem of urological reconstruction in the severely compromised patient. J. Urol., 140: 1152, 1988.
2.
DavidssonT.: Physiological aspects on the use of bowel segments in the urinary tract. Scand. J. Urol. Nephrol. Suppl.128: 13, 1990.
3.
GleesonM.J., GriffithD.P.: Urinary Diversion. Brit. J. Urol., 66; 113, 1990.
4.
KochK.O., GurevitchE., HillD.E., Mc DougalW.S.: Urinary solute transport by intestinal segments: a comparative study of ileum and colon in rats. J. Urol., 143: 1275, 1990.
5.
KoskoJ.W., KurshE.D., ResnickM.I.: Metabolic complications of urologic intestinal substitutes. In the use of large and small bowel in urologic surgery, edited by ResnickM.I. and CaldamoneA.A., Philadelphia Saunders Company, pp. 193–200, 1986.
6.
NurseD.E., MundyA.R.: Metabolic complications of cystoplasty. Brit. J. Urol., 63: 165, 1989.
7.
BoydS.D., SchiffW.M., SkinnerD.G., LieskowskyG., KanellosA.W., KlimaszewskiA.D.: Prospective Study of metabolic abnormalities in patients with continent Kock pouch urinary diversion. J. Urol., 33: 85, 1989.
8.
PhilipsonB.M., KockN.G., HoeckenstromT., NorlènL.J., AhrenC., HanssonH.A.: Ultrastructural and histochemical changes in ileal reservoir mucosa after long-term exposure to urine. A study in patients with continent urostomy (Kock pouch). Scand. J. Gastroenterol., 21: 1235, 1986.
9.
TomasinoR.M., MorelloV., LetteriM.A., SpinnatoG., PantusoG., OrestanoF.: Histological and histochemical changes in the colon mucosa after ureterosigmoidostomy or colonic conduit. Eur. Urol., 15: 248, 1988.
10.
KoffS.A.: Guidelines to determine the size and shape of intestinal segments used for reconstruction. J. Urol., 140; 1150, 1988.
11.
OlssonC.A.: Urinary diversion. J. Urol., 142: 1301, 1989.
12.
SchreiterF., NollF.: Kock pouch and S bladder: 2 different ways of lower urinary tract reconstruction. J. Urol., 142; 1197, 1989.
13.
HaussmannD.A., Mc LorieG.A., ChurchillB.M.: Non-refluxing colonic conduits: a long-term life-table analysis. J. Urol., 142: 1201, 1989.
14.
HinmanF.Jr.: Selection of intestinal segment for bladder substitution: physical and physiological characteristics. J. Urol., 139: 519, 1988.
15.
LeandriP., RossignolG., GautierJ.-R., QuintensH., LasserreE., CaisselJ.: Ileal low-pressure bladder replacement: Carney type II. Stapling technique and preliminary results (57 cases, 1987–1989). Eur. Urol., 18: 161–165 (1990).
16.
EkmanH., JakobssonB., KockN., SundinT.: The functional behaviour of different types of intestinal urinary bladder substitutes.London: Livingstone p. 213, vol. 2, 1964.
17.
Di TonnoF., LavelliD., LauriniL., ArtibaniW.: Neoblase, ein Jahr danach: die Vescica Ileale Padovana (VIP). Die Gruende einer Wahl. Muenster: 37. Tagung der Nordrhein-Westfaelischen Gesellschaft für Urologie, p. 88, 1991.
18.
KockN.G., NilsonA.E., NilssonL.O., NorlènL.J., PhilipsonB.M.: Urinary diversion via a continent ileal reservoir: clinical results in 12 patients. J. Urol., 128: 469, 1982.
19.
PaganoF., ArtibaniW., LigatoP., PiazzaR., GarbeglioA., PasseriniG.: Vescica Ileale Padovana: a technique for total bladder replacement. Eur. Urol., 17; 149, 1990.
20.
StuderU.E., CasanovaG.A., ZinggE.J.: Bladder substitution with an ileal low-pressure reservoir. Eur. Urol., 14 suppl.1: 36, 1988.
21.
HammerE.: Cancer du colon sigmoide dix anx après implantation des ureters d'une vessie extrophisée. J. Urol. Nephrol., 28; 260, 1929.
22.
WarrenR.B., WarnerT.F.C.S., HafezG.R.: Late development of colonic adenocarcinoma 48 years after ureterosigmoidostomy for extrophy of the bladder. J. Urol., 124: 550, 1980.
23.
StilwellT.J., MyersR.P.: Adenomatous polyp in defunctionalized colonic segment used as a urinary bladder. Urology., 32: 538, 1988.
24.
KaelbleT., TrickerA.R., FriedlP., WaldherrR., HoengJ., StaehlerG., MoehringK.: Ureterosigmoidostomy: long-term results, risk of carcinoma and etiological factors for carcinogenesis. J. Urol., 144: 1110, 1990.
25.
HarzmannR.: Harnableitungskarzinom: Fiktion oder Realitaet? Akt. Urol., 20: 179, 1989.
26.
UehlingD.U., StarlingJ.R., GilchristK.W.: Surveillance colonoscopy after ureterosigmoidostomy. J. Urol., 127: 34, 1982.
27.
ShandsC., McDougalW.S., WrightE.P.: Prevention of cancer at the urothelial enteric anastomotic site. J. Urol., 141: 178, 1989.
28.
DaherN., GautierR., AbourachidH., DecanesC., BaraJ.: Rat colonic carcinogenesis after ureterosigmoidostomy: pathogenesis and immunohistological study. J. Urol., 139: 1331, 1988.
29.
DurransD., WujantoR., CarrollR.N.P., TorranceH.B.: Bile acid malabsorption: a complication of conduit surgery. Brit. J. Urol., 64: 485, 2989.
30.
ThueroffJ.W., AlkenP., RiedmillerH., EngelmannU., JacobiG.H., HohenfellnerR.: The MAINZ pouch (Mixed Augmentation Ileum And Cecum) for bladder augmentation and continent diversion. J. Urol., 136: 17, 1986.
