Commentary to Partial Urogenital Mobilization in Cloacal Malformation: Is it a Viable Option?

Abstract

This study reports outcomes of a cohort of 10 patients with short (<3cm) common channel cloacal malformations (CM) who underwent partial urogenital sinus mobilization (PUM). 1 Al-Soudan Al-Anazi N, Curry J, Blackburn S, et al. Partial urogenital mobilization in cloacal malformation: is it a viable option? J Pediatr Urol Google Scholar The authors emphasize the utility of PUM in patients with short common channels, specifically noting that PUM has good continence outcomes with appropriate separation of the urethra and vagina at a median of five-year follow-up. Partial urogenital mobilization in cloacal malformation: is it a viable option?Journal of Pediatric UrologyPreviewTotal Urogenital Mobilization (TUM) has been the standard surgical approach for the urogenital complex in Cloacal Malformations (CM) since its inception in 1997. Partial Urogenital Mobilization (PUM) in CM remains an under-utilized or under-reported option. The main anatomical difference between TUM and PUM is the division of the pubo-urethral ligaments. Full-Text PDF Response to commentary to Partial Urogenital Mobilization in Cloacal Malformation: is it a viable option?Journal of Pediatric UrologyPreviewWe thank you for your comments and are pleased to know our article was well received. We would like to make clear that there was no separation of urethra and vagina but mobilisation of the urogenital complex. This may be semantic. Full-Text PDF