Comparison of musculoskeletal and urological functional outcomes in patients with bladder exstrophy undergoing repair with and without osteotomy

It is controversial as to whether osteotomy, by restoring a more normal pelvic anatomy, might improve the final outcome of bladder exstrophy (BE) repairs. We compared the functional orthopaedic and urological outcomes in BE patients treated with and without osteotomy. Orthopaedic and urological outcomes were compared in eight BE patients treated with osteotomy and six BE patients treated without osteotomy. Orthopaedic evaluation included an assessment of pubic bones dissymmetry, bending of the spine, presence of Trendelenburg or Thomas sign, and presence of out-toeing. Pubic diastasis was ruled out on a plain X-ray of the pelvis. A Pediatric Orthopedic Society of North America (POSNA) questionnaire was administered to every child or his/her caregiver to assess functional outcome. Urological evaluation included an assessment of required continence surgeries and of contemporary continence status. All patients presented a pubic diastasis. This was in median 49 (24–66) mm in patients treated without osteotomy and 42 (25–101) mm in those treated with osteotomy (p = 0.3). There was no difference either in the orthopaedic outcome or in any features of the POSNA questionnaire between groups. Neither was there a difference in the final continence rate nor in the number of additional continence procedures required. Although osteotomy is an essential step in the treatment of many BE patients in order to achieve a tension-free closure of the abdominal wall and bladder, our preliminary results suggest that it does not improve the eventual orthopaedic or urological outcomes of BE.