Skip to main content

Mansoura Neobladder

The Mansoura neobladder (also known as the Abol-Enein and Ghoneim procedure) is a detubularized W-shaped ileal orthotopic neobladder featuring the innovative serous-lined extramural tunnel (SLET) for antireflux ureteral reimplantation, developed by Hassan Abol-Enein and Mohamed A. Ghoneim at the Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University, Egypt. First reported in 1994 and refined through one of the largest single-center orthotopic neobladder experiences in the developing world (450+ patients by 2001), it represents one of the most significant contributions to reconstructive urology — particularly for its novel antireflux mechanism, which has been adopted worldwide.[1][2]

Historical Development​

The Mansoura Urology and Nephrology Center became one of the world's highest-volume radical cystectomy centers, driven by the endemic burden of schistosomiasis-associated bladder cancer in Egypt. Ghoneim's early radical-cystectomy experience for bilharzial bladder cancer dates to the 1970s.[3][4]

  • 1994 — Abol-Enein and Ghoneim published the preliminary SLET report in 12 patients with a W-shaped ileal neobladder — the defining innovation.[2]
  • 1999 — The SLET principle was extended to a continent cutaneous outlet (serous-lined extramural ileal valve) in 23 patients.[5]
  • 2001 — The landmark 450-patient series (353 men, 97 women) established efficacy and durability at scale.[1]
  • 2004 — SLET applied to continent cutaneous ileal pouches in over 100 patients.[6]
  • 2009 — A prospective RCT from Mansoura compared SLET with the T-limb ileal procedure, confirming SLET superiority for reflux prevention.[7]
  • 2020 — SLET ("Mansoura technique") applied to pediatric bladder-exstrophy reconstruction after failed colonic diversions.[8]

Design Principles​

The Mansoura neobladder addresses two challenges in orthotopic substitution: a low-pressure / high-capacity reservoir, and reflux prevention without ureteral obstruction.[1][2]

  1. Detubularization of the ileal segment along the antimesenteric border disrupts coordinated peristalsis.
  2. W-shaped quadruple fold maximizes sphericity and volume while minimizing intraluminal pressure (Laplace's law) — identical in principle to the Hautmann.
  3. Serous-lined extramural tunnel (SLET) — exploits the natural compressive properties of the serosal surfaces of adjacent ileal limbs to create a passive antireflux valve, without submucosal dissection or intussusception.[2]

Surgical Technique​

W-Shaped Ileal Reservoir​

  1. Bowel isolation — approximately 40–50 cm of distal ileum is isolated 15–20 cm proximal to the ileocecal valve.[1][9]
  2. Ileoileal anastomosis restores GI continuity.
  3. Detubularization — the segment is opened along the entire antimesenteric border.
  4. W-configuration — the ileal plate is folded into four limbs, creating a wide near-spherical reservoir.
  5. Posterior plate — medial edges of adjacent limbs are sutured together to form the posterior wall.
  6. Urethral anastomosis — the most dependent portion of the W is anastomosed to the membranous urethra.
  7. Anterior closure — free edges are folded upward and sutured to complete the reservoir.

Serous-Lined Extramural Tunnel (SLET) — The Mansoura Innovation​

This is the signature contribution of the Mansoura group.[2]

  1. Tunnel creation — before closing the anterior wall, the serosal surfaces of two adjacent ileal limbs are identified where they naturally appose.
  2. Serosal incision — two parallel incisions (~3–4 cm apart) are made through the serosa only on the outer surface of one limb, creating a serosal flap.
  3. Trough formation — the serosal flap is elevated to create a serous-lined trough (gutter) between the two adjacent limbs.
  4. Ureteral embedding — the spatulated ureter is laid into the trough and the serosal flap is closed over it, creating an extramural tunnel lined by serosa.
  5. Compression mechanism — as the neobladder fills, rising intraluminal pressure compresses the tunnel against the adjacent limb, creating a passive antireflux valve analogous to the native ureterovesical junction but using serosa instead of mucosa.
  6. Bilateral tunnels — two serous-lined tunnels are created (one each side of the W) for bilateral ureteral reimplantation.

Advantages over other antireflux techniques:[2][10]

  • No submucosal dissection (unlike Le Duc-Camey or Leadbetter).
  • No intussusception (unlike Kock nipple valve).
  • Works equally well — and often better — with dilated ureters.[10][11]
  • Low stricture rate; extramural position avoids mucosal-to-mucosal healing complications.
  • Technically reproducible across centers.[10][11][12]

Modified Ghoneim Technique (Siracusano, 2000)​

Both ureters are reimplanted in a single serous-lined tunnel on the right side of the W, reducing operative time while maintaining anastomotic stability.[13]

Functional Outcomes — 450-Patient Series (Abol-Enein & Ghoneim, 2001)​

ParameterResult
Total patients450 (353 male, 97 female)
Evaluable patients344 (mean follow-up 38 ± 25 months)
Hospital mortality0.8% (4 patients)
Early complications9% — all conservative except 3 vaginal-fistula repairs
Daytime continence93.3%
Nighttime continence80%
Upper tracts unchanged or improved96.2% of reimplanted renal units
Reflux rate3%
Urethral recurrence3 isolated cases
Late complicationsPouch stones (10), outflow obstruction (11), mucous retention (2), adhesive SBO (3), hypercontinence in 9 women

Source: Abol-Enein 2001.[1]

Comparative Data — Mansoura (AG) vs Mainz Pouch (Bedük 2003)​

ParameterAG ProcedureMainz Pouch
Ureterointestinal stenosis5.7%10.5%
Pouch-urethral stenosis5.5%5.3%
Pouch-ureteral reflux4.2%7.9%
Pyelonephritis13.8%15.8%
Daytime incontinence5.5%5.3%
Nighttime incontinence8.4%21%
Capacity (12 mo)442 ± 27 mL426 ± 34 mL
Max flow rate16 ± 6.1 mL/s19.6 ± 3.7 mL/s
Residual urine45 ± 7.1 mL37 ± 8.2 mL

The AG procedure showed lower rates of reflux, stenosis, and nocturnal incontinence with comparable urodynamics.[14]

Female Patients — Mansoura Experience​

The Mansoura group was among the pioneers of orthotopic neobladder in women.[15][16]

  • 60 women (mean age 48.3 yr) — 47 ileal W-neobladder with SLET, 13 hemi-Kock. No perioperative mortality (1 fatal PE postoperatively). Of 43 evaluable: 74.4% continent day and night; 6 nighttime incontinence; 2 daytime stress incontinence; 1 totally incontinent. Six women had difficulty emptying spontaneously due to acute urethra-pouch angulation — a recognized anatomical challenge in female neobladder patients.[15]
  • 192 women (expanded series) — early complications included pouch-vaginal fistula in 3.1%; late complications: ureteroileal stricture 19, reflux 22, stones 18.[16]

SLET — Detailed Evidence​

Original Description (1994, n = 12)​

All examined renal units demonstrated nonobstructed unidirectional flow at mean 18-month follow-up.[2]

450-Patient Validation (2001)​

Reflux 3%; upper-tract preservation 96.2%.[1]

RCT — SLET vs T-Limb (Osman 2009)​

The only RCT directly comparing SLET with another antireflux technique.[7]

ParameterSLETT-LimbP value
Patients (renal units)27 (49)23 (45)—
Mean follow-up (yr)6.37.4—
Uretero-ileal stricture2%2.2%NS
Reflux0%29%0.01
Progressive cortical scarring3 units4 units—
Significant GFR reduction (>25%)3 units4 units (3 among refluxing)—

SLET provided a significantly more effective antireflux mechanism (0% vs 29%, p = 0.01) with equivalent stricture rates.[7]

External Validation​

  • Papadopoulos (Germany, 2001) — n = 50; only 1 patient (2%) with unilateral grade IV reflux; 4 ureteral strictures (8%); preoperative ureteral dilatation alleviated in all affected patients; technique performed with equal or greater ease in dilated ureters.[10]
  • Türkölmez (Turkey, 2004) — n = 42; reflux 3.7%; stricture 3.7%; no metabolic complications; renal function stabilized or improved in all.[11]
  • Wiesner (Mainz Pouch I, 2007) — long-term comparison of submucosal tunnel (ST) vs SLET (ET) in 458 patients (809 ST, 74 SLET):
ParameterSubmucosal TunnelSLET
Anastomotic obstruction7.3%4.1%
Obstruction-free at 10 yr91%96%
Obstruction in dilated upper tracts13.9%3.1%
Obstruction in neurogenic bladder17.1%7.1%
Serum creatinine ≤ 1.6 mg/dL97%98%

SLET showed lower obstruction rates than the submucosal tunnel, especially in patients with preoperatively dilated upper tracts (3.1% vs 13.9%).[17]

Versatility of the SLET Principle​

The SLET principle has been applied far beyond the original orthotopic neobladder.[5][6][8][12]

  1. Orthotopic neobladder — antireflux ureteral reimplantation (original application).[1][2]
  2. Continent cutaneous diversion — SLET for both antireflux valve and continent outlet construction (109 patients, Mansoura).[6]
  3. Continent cutaneous catheterizable channel — embedding the appendix or tapered ileal segment.[8]
  4. Ileal ureter replacement — antireflux mechanism at the proximal end of an ileal ureter.[12]
  5. Total ureteral replacement — tubularized colonic segment with SLET for unidirectional flow.[12]
  6. Pediatric applications — bladder-exstrophy patients requiring conversion from failed diversions.[8]

Kato et al. (Japan, 2001) confirmed versatility across these applications in 29 patients with no obstruction or reflux in 52 reimplanted ureters and no incontinence in 11 continent valves.[12]

Complications​

ComplicationIncidence
Hospital mortality0.8%
Early complications (overall)9%
Pouch stones2.9%
Outflow obstruction3.2%
Mucous retention0.6%
Adhesive SBO0.9%
Hypercontinence (women)9.3%
Ureteroileal stricture5.7% (AG series)
Reflux3% of reimplanted renal units
Pouch-vaginal fistula (women)3.1% (6/192)

Source: Abol-Enein 2001; Ali-el-Dein 2008.[1][16]

Comparison with Other Neobladders​

FeatureMansoura (AG)Hautmann (W)StuderVIP (Padova)
Year introduced1994198619851989
ConfigurationW (quadruple fold)W (quadruple fold)U-fold + afferent limbDouble fold
Ileal length~40–50 cm~60–70 cm~54–60 cm~40–50 cm
Antireflux mechanismSLETLe Duc-Camey or chimneyAfferent limb (refluxing)Afferent limb (intact)
Reflux rate3%15–31% (Le Duc)Refluxing by designAbsent (original series)
Stricture rate2–5.7%2.7–4.9%2.7%14% (robotic)
Daytime continence93.3%90–96%87–93%87–96%
Nighttime continence80%82–95%72–79%60–81%

Strengths and Limitations​

Strengths

  • SLET = the most effective antireflux mechanism in an RCT — 0% vs 29% reflux with T-limb (p = 0.01).[7]
  • Extremely low stricture rate (2–5.7%).[1][2][11][17]
  • Particularly suited to dilated ureters — lower obstruction rates than submucosal tunnel.[10][11][17]
  • Excellent upper-tract preservation (96.2%).[1]
  • Versatile principle — applied to neobladder, continent cutaneous diversion, catheterizable channels, ileal ureter, and pediatric reconstruction.[5][6][8][12]
  • One of the largest single-center neobladder experiences (450+ patients, including 97 women).[1]
  • Pioneering female neobladder experience.[15][16]

Limitations

  • Technical complexity — SLET adds operative time vs simple refluxing (Bricker / Wallace) anastomoses.
  • Nighttime continence (80%) is comparable to but not superior to Hautmann (82–95%).[1]
  • Hypercontinence in women (9.3%) requiring CIC.[1]
  • Limited adoption outside specialized centers — requires familiarity with the SLET principle.

The Antireflux Debate — Mansoura vs Bern​

The Mansoura neobladder represents one side of the most important ongoing debate in orthotopic neobladder surgery — whether antireflux ureteral reimplantation is necessary.

  • Mansoura (Abol-Enein / Ghoneim) — formal antireflux mechanisms (SLET) are essential. The RCT shows refluxing T-limb anastomoses cause 29% reflux with measurable GFR deterioration in some units.[7]
  • Bern (Studer) — an afferent isoperistaltic 20 cm ileal limb provides adequate indirect upper-tract protection without formal antireflux mechanisms. In 482 patients followed 20 years: ureteroileal stenosis 2.7%, age-related-only renal-function decline, no long-term acidosis in patients with normal baseline renal function.[18]

Both approaches show excellent long-term results, and the debate is unresolved. Mansoura provides the strongest evidence that formal antireflux mechanisms achieve near-zero reflux; Studer demonstrates that refluxing anastomoses with an afferent limb do not compromise long-term renal function in selected patients.[1][7][18]

Legacy and Current Status​

  1. The SLET is the most important innovation — validated in the only RCT comparing antireflux techniques (0% reflux, 2% stricture).[2][7]
  2. The SLET principle has proven universally versatile across orthotopic, continent cutaneous, catheterizable-channel, ileal-ureter, and pediatric applications.[5][6][8][12]
  3. The Mansoura group provided one of the earliest and largest experiences with female orthotopic neobladder (97 → 192 women), establishing feasibility and outcomes.[1][15][16]
  4. The 450-patient series remains one of the largest single-center neobladder experiences with robust long-term data.[1]
  5. External validation at multiple international centers (Germany, Turkey, Japan, Italy) confirms reproducibility.[10][11][12][13][17]

The Mansoura neobladder and SLET continue to be used at Mansoura and at centers worldwide, particularly when dilated ureters make other antireflux techniques challenging. SLET has been incorporated into modifications of other neobladder types (Camey II, Mainz Pouch I) and adapted for pediatric applications.[8][13][17]

Key Takeaways​

  1. The Mansoura neobladder is a W-shaped detubularized ileal orthotopic neobladder distinguished by the SLET for antireflux ureteral reimplantation — the most effective antireflux mechanism validated in an RCT (0% reflux, p = 0.01).[1][2][7]
  2. In the 450-patient series, daytime / nighttime continence were 93.3% / 80% with upper tracts unchanged or improved in 96.2% and reflux 3%.[1]
  3. SLET is particularly advantageous in dilated ureters, with lower obstruction rates (3.1%) than submucosal tunnels (13.9%).[10][17]
  4. The SLET principle is universally versatile across orthotopic / continent cutaneous / catheterizable-channel / ileal-ureter / pediatric applications.[5][6][8][12]
  5. The Mansoura group was among the pioneers of orthotopic neobladder in women — 192 women in the expanded series; hypercontinence 9.3% and pouch-vaginal fistula 3.1% remain recognized complications.[1][15][16]
  6. The antireflux debate is unresolved — Mansoura SLET achieves near-zero reflux; Studer afferent-limb data show refluxing anastomoses do not compromise long-term renal function in selected patients.[1][7][18]

See Also​

References​

1. Abol-Enein H, Ghoneim MA. "Functional Results of Orthotopic Ileal Neobladder With Serous-Lined Extramural Ureteral Reimplantation: Experience With 450 Patients." J Urol. 2001;165(5):1427–32. PMID: 11342894

2. Abol-Enein H, Ghoneim MA. "A Novel Uretero-Ileal Reimplantation Technique: The Serous Lined Extramural Tunnel. A Preliminary Report." J Urol. 1994;151(5):1193–7. doi:10.1016/s0022-5347(17)35211-4

3. Ghoneim MA, Awaad HK. "Results of Treatment in Carcinoma of the Bilharzial Bladder." J Urol. 1980;123(6):850–2. doi:10.1016/s0022-5347(17)56159-5

4. Ghoneim MA, El-Hamady SM, El-Bolkainy MN, et al. "Radical Cystectomy for Carcinoma of Bilharzial Bladder. Technique and Results." Urology. 1976;8(6):547–52. doi:10.1016/0090-4295(76)90515-x

5. Abol-Enein H, Ghoneim MA. "Serous Lined Extramural Ileal Valve: A New Continent Urinary Outlet." J Urol. 1999;161(3):786–91. PMID: 10022684

6. Abol-Enein H, Salem M, Mesbah A, et al. "Continent Cutaneous Ileal Pouch Using the Serous Lined Extramural Valves. The Mansoura Experience in More Than 100 Patients." J Urol. 2004;172(2):588–91. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000129437.33688.4d

7. Osman Y, Abol-Enein H, El-Mekresh M, et al. "Comparison Between a Serous-Lined Extramural Tunnel and T-Limb Ileal Procedure as an Antireflux Technique in Orthotopic Ileal Substitutes: A Prospective Randomized Trial." BJU Int. 2009;104(10):1518–21. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08574.x

8. Abdelhalim A, Soltan MA, Helmy TE, Dawaba ME, Hafez AT. "Ileal Neobladder With a Continent Cutaneous Catheterizable Channel Using the Extramural Serous Lined (Mansoura) Technique in a Bladder Exstrophy Patient." Urology. 2020;146:302. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2020.09.021

9. Hussein AA, Ahmed YE, Kozlowski JD, et al. "Robot-Assisted Approach to 'W'-Configuration Urinary Diversion: A Step-by-Step Technique." BJU Int. 2017;120(1):152–7. doi:10.1111/bju.13824

10. Papadopoulos I, Weichert-Jacobsen K. "Experiences With the Entero-Ureteral Anastomosis via the Extramural Serous-Lined Tunnel: Procedure of Abol-Enein." Urology. 2001;57(2):234–8. doi:10.1016/s0090-4295(00)00904-3

11. Türkölmez K, Baltaci S, Göğüş C, Bedük Y, Göğüş O. "Results of the Ureteral Reimplantation With Serous-Lined Extramural Tunnel in Orthotopic Ileal W-Neobladder." Int J Urol. 2004;11(6):368–73. doi:10.1111/j.1442-2042.2004.00807.x

12. Kato H, Kiyokawa H, Igawa Y, Nishizawa O. "The Serous-Lined Tunnel Principle for Urinary Reconstruction: A More Rational Method." BJU Int. 2001;87(9):783–8. doi:10.1046/j.1464-410x.2001.02229.x

13. Siracusano S, Liguori G, Trombetta C, d'Aloia G, Belgrano E. "Modified Ghoneim's Technique Using a Single Serous-Lined Extramural Tunnel in Detubularized Orthotopic Ileal W-Bladder." Eur Urol. 2000;38(3):313–5. doi:10.1159/000020299

14. Bedük Y, Türkölmez K, Baltaci S, Göğüş C. "Comparison of Clinical and Urodynamic Outcome in Orthotopic Ileocaecal and Ileal Neobladder." Eur Urol. 2003;43(3):258–62. doi:10.1016/s0302-2838(03)00042-3

15. Ali-el-Dein B, el-Sobky E, Hohenfellner M, Ghoneim MA. "Orthotopic Bladder Substitution in Women: Functional Evaluation." J Urol. 1999;161(6):1875–80. PMID: 10332455

16. Ali-el-Dein B, Shaaban AA, Abu-Eideh RH, et al. "Surgical Complications Following Radical Cystectomy and Orthotopic Neobladders in Women." J Urol. 2008;180(1):206–10; discussion 210. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2008.03.080

17. Wiesner C, Pahernik S, Stein R, et al. "Long-Term Follow-Up of Submucosal Tunnel and Serosa-Lined Extramural Tunnel Ureter Implantation in Ileocaecal Continent Cutaneous Urinary Diversion (Mainz Pouch I)." BJU Int. 2007;100(3):633–7. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.06991.x

18. Studer UE, Burkhard FC, Schumacher M, et al. "Twenty Years Experience With an Ileal Orthotopic Low Pressure Bladder Substitute — Lessons to Be Learned." J Urol. 2006;176(1):161–6. doi:10.1016/S0022-5347(06)00573-8