Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Age-related urologic problems in the complex urologic patient



Improved medical care throughout childhood and adolescence has enabled patients with complex urological abnormalities to live longer into adulthood. These patients are now at risk of developing common, age-related, urological conditions. This review aims to review existing data and make recommendations in areas where expert opinion is currently lacking


This review represents the joint SIU-ICUD (Société Internationale d’Urologie-International Consultation on Urological Disease) consultation on congenital lifelong urology. The results of this analysis were first presented at a joint consultation of the ICUD and SIU at the 2018 SIU annual conference in Seoul, South Korea.


BPH may present differently in patients with neurogenic bladder. Thorough assessment of neurological status, bladder and sphincter function is required before offering any bladder outlet surgery. Prostate specific antigen screening should be offered to men aged 50–69 with neurogenic bladders if they have good life expectancy. Multi-parametric MRI and transperineal biopsy would be the investigations of choice if feasible. Surgery for localized disease should only be done by surgeons with the relevant expertise. Bladder cancer in this patient group is more likely to present at a later stage and have a worse prognosis. Parenthood is achievable for most, but often requires assistance with conception. Pregnant women who have had previous urogenital reconstructive surgery should be managed in appropriate obstetric units with the involvement of a reconstructive urologist.


Most evidence regarding complex urogenital abnormalities comes from the pediatric population. Evidence regarding common, age-related urological issues is generally from the ‘normal’ adult population. As patients with complex congenital urological conditions live longer, more data will become available to assess the long-term benefits of intervention.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. 1.

    Kondo A, Kamihira O, Ozawa H (2009) Neural tube defects: Prevalence, etiology and prevention. Int J Urol 16:49–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2042.2008.02163.x

  2. 2.

    International Clearinghouse for Birth Defects Monitoring Systems (1987) Epidemiology of bladder exstrophy and epispadias: a communication from the International Clearinghouse for Birth Defects Monitoring Systems. Teratology 36:221–227. https://doi.org/10.1002/tera.1420360210

  3. 3.

    Verhoef M, Lurvink M, Barf HA et al (2005) High prevalence of incontinence among young adults with spina bifida: description, prediction and problem perception. Spinal Cord 43:331–340. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.sc.3101705

  4. 4.

    Choi EK, Ji Y, Han SW (2017) Sexual function and quality of life in young men with spina bifida: could it be neglected aspects in clinical practice? Urology 108:225–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2016.11.052

  5. 5.

    Blaivas JG, Sidhu R (2008) Benign prostatic hyperplasia and lower urinary tract symptoms in men with neurogenic bladder. In: Textbook of the neurogenic bladder. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 874–892

  6. 6.

    Hartman C, Firoozi F (2015) BPH and pelvic organ prolapse in patients with neurogenic bladder. Transition and lifelong care in congenital urology. Humana Press, Cham, pp 131–139

  7. 7.

    Husmann DA (2016) Long-term complications following bladder augmentations in patients with spina bifida: bladder calculi, perforation of the augmented bladder and upper tract deterioration. Transl Androl Urol 5:3–11. https://doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2223-4683.2015.12.06

  8. 8.

    Levey AS, Coresh J, Greene T et al (2006) Using standardized serum creatinine values in the modification of diet in renal disease study equation for estimating glomerular filtration rate. Ann Intern Med 145:247–254. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-145-4-200608150-00004

  9. 9.

    Schwartz GJ, Work DF (2009) Measurement and estimation of GFR in children and adolescents. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 4:1832–1843. https://doi.org/10.2215/CJN.01640309

  10. 10.

    Soveri I, Berg UB, Björk J et al (2014) Measuring GFR: a systematic review. Am J Kidney Dis 64:411–424. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.2014.04.010

  11. 11.

    Woodhouse CRJ, Neild GH, Yu RN, Bauer S (2012) Adult care of children from pediatric urology. J Urol 187:1164–1171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.12.011

  12. 12.

    Gorriz JL, Martinez-Castelao A (2012) Proteinuria: detection and role in native renal disease progression. Transpl Rev (Orlando) 26:3–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trre.2011.10.002

  13. 13.

    Ganesan V, De S, Greene D et al (2017) Accuracy of ultrasonography for renal stone detection and size determination: is it good enough for management decisions? BJU Int 119:464–469. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13605

  14. 14.

    Knutson T, Edlund C, Fall M, Dahlstrand C (2001) BPH with coexisting overactive bladder dysfunction—an everyday urological dilemma. Neurourol Urodyn 20:237–247. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.1001

  15. 15.

    Cameron AP (2016) Medical management of neurogenic bladder with oral therapy. Transl Androl Urol 5:51–62. https://doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2223-4683.2015.12.07

  16. 16.

    Noordhoff TC, Groen J, Scheepe JR, Blok BFM (2018) Surgical management of anatomic bladder outlet obstruction in males with neurogenic bladder dysfunction: a systematic review. Eur Urol Focus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2018.02.009

  17. 17.

    Kiciński M, Vangronsveld J, Nawrot TS (2011) An epidemiological reappraisal of the familial aggregation of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE One 6:e27130. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0027130

  18. 18.

    Kheirandish P, Chinegwundoh F (2011) Ethnic differences in prostate cancer. Br J Cancer 105:481–485. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2011.273

  19. 19.

    Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Månsson M et al (2019) A 16-yr follow-up of the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer. Eur Urol 76:43–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.009

  20. 20.

    Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL et al (2012) Prostate cancer screening in the randomized Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial: mortality results after 13 years of follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst 104:125–132. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djr500

  21. 21.

    Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ et al (2014) Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up. Lancet 384:2027–2035. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60525-0

  22. 22.

    Loeb S (2014) Guideline of guidelines: prostate cancer screening. BJU Int 114:323–325. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12854

  23. 23.

    Barbonetti A, D'Andrea S, Martorella A et al (2018) Risk of prostate cancer in men with spinal cord injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Asian J Androl 20:555–560. https://doi.org/10.4103/aja.aja_31_18

  24. 24.

    Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M et al (2018) MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med 378:1767–1777. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1801993

  25. 25.

    Kum F, Elhage O, Maliyil J et al (2018) Initial outcomes of local anaesthetic freehand transperineal biopsies in the outpatient setting. BJU Int. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14620

  26. 26.

    Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA et al (2016) 10-Year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1606220

  27. 27.

    Donovan JL, Hamdy FC, Lane JA et al (2016) Patient-reported outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1606221

  28. 28.

    James ND, Sydes MR, Clarke NW et al (2016) Addition of docetaxel, zoledronic acid, or both to first-line long-term hormone therapy in prostate cancer (STAMPEDE): survival results from an adaptive, multiarm, multistage, platform randomised controlled trial. Lancet 387:1163–1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01037-5

  29. 29.

    Meléndez M, Maroto A, Illescas T et al (2018) Bladder cancer in patients with spina bifida: observation from an adult clinic. Spinal Cord Ser Cases 4:1–4. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41394-018-0066-7

  30. 30.

    Locke JR, Hill DE, Walzer Y (1985) Incidence of squamous cell carcinoma in patients with long-term catheter drainage. J Urol 133:1034–1035

  31. 31.

    Husmann DA (2009) Malignancy after gastrointestinal augmentation in childhood. Ther Adv Urol 1:5–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/1756287209104163

  32. 32.

    Chan R, Scovell J, Jeng Z et al (2014) The fate of transitional urology patients referred to a tertiary transitional care center. Urology 84:1544–1548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2014.08.022

  33. 33.

    Diamond DA, Rickwood AMK, Thomas DG (1986) Penile erections in myelomeningocele patients. BJU Int 58:434–435. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.1986.tb09099.x

  34. 34.

    Reddy SS, Inouye BM, Anele UA et al (2015) Sexual health outcomes in adults with complete male epispadias. J Urol 194:1091–1095

  35. 35.

    Jalkanen J, Mattila AK, Heikkilä J et al (2013) The impact of posterior urethral valves on adult quality of life. J Pediatr Urol 9:579–584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2012.07.006

  36. 36.

    Rubenwolf P, Thomas C, Thüroff JW, Stein R (2016) Sexual function, social integration and paternity of males with classic bladder exstrophy following urinary diversion. J Urol 195:465–470

  37. 37.

    Hultling C, Levi R, Amark P, Sjöblom P (2000) Semen retrieval and analysis in men with myelomeningocele. Dev Med Child Neurol 42:681–684. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2000.tb00679.x

  38. 38.

    Deans R, Banks F, Liao L-M et al (2012) Reproductive outcomes in women with classic bladder exstrophy: an observational cross-sectional study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 206:496.e1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2012.03.016

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Nicholas Faure Walker.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Faure Walker, N., Gill, B., Olsburgh, J. et al. Age-related urologic problems in the complex urologic patient. World J Urol (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03111-4

Download citation


  • Urology
  • Neurogenic bladder
  • Prostate cancer
  • Hypogonadism