Bladder Augmentation Versus Urinary Diversion in Patients With Spina Bifida in the United States

PURPOSE: Augmentation cystoplasty has replaced urinary diversion as the cornerstone of surgical management of refractory neurogenic bladder in patients with spina bifida. Other than single institution series little is known about practice patterns of bladder augmentation vs diversion. Therefore, we characterized the use of bladder augmentation and urinary diversion in patients with spina bifida in a nationally representative, all payer, all ages data set. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Discharge estimates were derived from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. All patients who underwent bladder augmentation or ileal conduit diversion between 1998 and 2005 with a diagnosis consistent with spina bifida were included in the study. RESULTS: Bladder augmentation was performed in an estimated 3,403 patients and ileal loop diversion in 772 with spina bifida between 1998 and 2005. Patients fell into 2 clinically distinct populations. Those patients undergoing bladder augmentation tended to be younger (mean age 16 vs 36 years, p <0.001) and male (52% of bladder augmentations vs 43% of urinary diversions, p = 0.02), and to have private insurance (46% vs 29%, p <0.001) compared to those undergoing urinary diversion. Furthermore, patients undergoing urinary diversion required more health care resources, with significantly longer hospital stays, higher total charges and more use of home health care after discharge home. CONCLUSIONS: Augmentation cystoplasty is widely used in the surgical management of neurogenic bladder in patients with spina bifida, although ileal loop diversion is still performed in a substantial proportion with clinically distinct characteristics.