Antegrade percutaneous balloon dilation of ureteral strictures after failed pelviureteric or ureterovesical reimplantation in children

Analysis of the Efficacy and Risk Factors for Failure of Balloon Dilation for Benign Ureteral Stricture

This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of balloon dilation in ureteral stricture and to analyze the risk factors for the failure of balloon dilation, which will hopefully provide some reference for clinicians to develop treatment plans. We retrospectively analyzed 196 patients who underwent balloon dilation between January 2012 and August 2022, 127 of whom had complete baseline and follow-up data. General clinical data, perioperative data, balloon parameters at the time of surgery, and follow-up results were collected from the patients. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed for the risk factors for surgical failure in patients undergoing balloon dilatation. The success rates of balloon dilatation (n = 30) and balloon dilatation combined with endoureterotomy (n = 37) for lower ureteral stricture at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year were 81.08%, 78.38%, and 78.38% and 90%, 90%, and 86.67%, respectively. The success rates of balloon dilation at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year in patients with recurrent upper ureteral stricture after pyeloplasty (n = 15) and primary treatment (n = 30) were 73.33%, 60%, and 53.33% and 80%, 80%, and 73.33%, respectively. The success rates of surgery at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year for patients with recurrence of lower ureteral stricture after ureteral reimplantation or endoureterotomy (n = 4) and primary treatment with balloon dilatation (n = 34) were 75%, 75%, and 75% and 85.29%, 79.41%, and 79.41%, respectively. Multivariate analysis of the failure of balloon dilation showed that balloon circumference and multiple ureteral strictures were risk factors for balloon dilation failure (OR = 0.143, 95% CI: 0.023-0.895, p = 0.038; OR = 1.221, 95% CI: 1.002-1.491, p = 0.05). Balloon dilation combined with endoureterotomy in lower ureteral stricture had a higher success rate than balloon dilation alone. The success rate of balloon dilation in the primary treatment of the upper and lower ureter was higher than that of balloon dilation in the secondary treatment after failed repair surgery. Balloon circumference and multiple ureteral strictures are risk factors for balloon dilation failure.

Contemporary management of ureteral strictures

Ureteral stricture disease is a luminal narrowing of the ureter leading to functional obstruction of the kidney. Treatment of strictures is mandatory to preserve and protect renal function. In recent times, the surgical management of ureteral strictures has evolved from open repair to include laparoscopic, robotic and interventional techniques. Prompt diagnosis and early first line intervention to limit obstructive complications remains the cornerstone of successful treatment. In this article, we discuss minimally invasive, endo-urological and open approaches to the repair of ureteral strictures. Open surgical repair and endoscopic techniques have traditionally been employed with varying degrees of success. The advent of laparoscopic and robotic approaches has reduced morbidity, improved cosmesis and shortened recovery time, with results that are beginning to mirror and in some cases surpass more traditional approaches.

Level of evidence: Not applicable for this multicentre audit.

Current status of minimally invasive endoscopic management of ureteric strictures

Endourological techniques are used more often nowadays in the treatment of ureteric strictures of various etiologies. Advances in technology have provided new tools to the armamentarium of the endoscopic urological surgeon. Numerous studies exist that investigate the efficiency and safety of each of the therapeutic modalities available. In this review, we attempt to demonstrate the available and contemporary evidence supporting each minimally invasive modality in the management of ureteric strictures.