Literature Review: Double-Barrelled Wet Colostomy (One Stoma) versus Ileal Conduit with Colostomy (Two Stomas)

Urol Int. 2017;98(3):249-254. doi: 10.1159/000450654. Epub 2016 Sep 22.


Introduction: The aim of this literature review was to analyse the advantages and disadvantages of a traditional ileal conduit (IC) with separate colostomy technique compared to the outcomes of a double-barrelled wet colostomy (DBWC) technique. The former technique results in the formation of two stomas, and the latter results in the formation of one stoma.

Methods: PubMed was searched electronically for articles on DBWC. Fifteen articles were retrieved and of them 13 were included in the literature review (350 patients). Of the articles, 3 directly compared DBWC to IC with colostomy.

Results: Review of 13 DBWC articles demonstrated perioperative mortality ranging between 0 and 11.1% and postoperative complications ranging from 0 to 100%. Three of the studies directly compared DBWC to IC with colostomy; median operating times and length of stay were shorter in DBWC patients (p < 0.001); 30-day morbidity was reported to either be lower in the DBWC group (p < 0.043) or to have no statistically significant difference. Rates of mortality, pyelonephritis, electrolyte disturbances and urinary anastomotic problems did not differ between the 2 groups.

Conclusion: The DBWC technique inherently has a benefit over the IC with colostomy technique, as it requires only one stoma. This literature review supports the use of the technically less challenging DBWC technique as a viable alternative to the traditional IC with colostomy technique.

Publication types

  • Review

MeSH terms

  • Anastomosis, Surgical
  • Colostomy / methods*
  • Humans
  • Length of Stay
  • Operative Time
  • Postoperative Complications / etiology*
  • Surgical Procedures, Operative*
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Urinary Diversion / adverse effects*
  • Urinary Diversion / methods*