Outcomes Following First-line Endourologic Management of Ureteroenteric Anastomotic Strictures After Urinary Diversion: A Single-center Study

Cut-to-the-light technique is useful for complete obstruction of a Wallace ureteroileal anastomosis

Introduction

Obstruction of a ureteroileal anastomosis after urinary diversion is an unpleasant situation for patients and clinicians alike.

Case presentation

A 48-year-old man who underwent a radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer and urinary diversion using the Wallace technique complained of right back pain. Computed tomography showed right hydronephrosis. Cystoscopy via the ileal conduit revealed complete obstruction of the ureteroileal anastomosis. We performed a bilateral approach (antegrade and retrograde) to use the cut-to-the-light technique. A guidewire and 7Fr single J catheter could be inserted.

Conclusion

The cut-to-the-light technique was useful for complete obstruction of the ureteroileal anastomosis, the length of which was <1 cm. Herein, we report on the cut-to-the-light technique with a literature review.

Contemporary management of benign uretero-enteric strictures after cystectomy: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Uretero-enteric stricture (UES) is a common post-operative complication after radical cystectomy with urinary diversion. The aim of this systematic review is to discuss the contemporary management of benign UES after cystectomy and to compare the different surgical approaches.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic review was performed from January 2000 through January 2021. Search engines used included PubMed, Embase and Medline databases. Search query was: ((ureteroileal OR uretero-ileal OR ureteroenteric OR ureteroenteric) AND (stricture OR stenosis)) AND (management OR treatment). Study selection followed the PRISMA statement. Studies tackling management of UES, either through open, endoscopic, laparoscopic or robot-assisted approaches, were included in our systematic review.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Forty-one studies were finally included in this systematic review. No prospective studies were found; all included studies were retrospective. Open surgical repair had a 78-100% success rate, a significant rate of complications, and a low recurrence rate (6-8%). Endourological management decreased complication rate, length-of-stay, and blood loss, with however lower success (15-50%) and higher recurrence rates (62%-91%) compared to open surgery. Robotic assisted surgery showed comparable success rates to open surgery (80-100%), while limiting the number of major complications and hospital length-of-stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical management of UES remains challenging. Open surgery maintains a role given its high success rate, at the cost however of a significant morbidity. On the other hand, endourological procedures offer a favorable and low complication risk, but a low long-term success rate. Robotic-assisted surgery is emerging with a valid resolution of UES as it offers comparable success rates to an open approach, while reducing surgical morbidity. Head-to-head comparisons are awaited to confirm these findings.

Endoscopic Procedures in the Treatment of Ureteroenteric Anastomotic Strictures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic procedures for ureteroenteric anastomotic strictures (UESs) after radical cystectomy and urinary diversion. Methods: We performed a meta-analysis of relevant articles through March 2020 using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register to assess the efficacy of endoscopic procedures in UES according to the PRISMA and PICOS criteria. The main endpoints were success rate and complications, and we also compared the efficacy of different methods and stricture length and side in UES. Cochrane Collaboration's Revman version 5.3 and Stata version 15.1 software were used for statistical analysis. Results: A total of 18 retrospective studies with 697 patients were included. The median follow-up ranges from 12 to 62.5 months. Patients treated with endoscopic procedures had an overall success rate of 46%. The pooled rate of Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3 complications was 3.8% among included studies. Laser vaporization and stent insertion (48 and 47%) had a relatively high success rate than balloon dilatation (35%). In subgroup analysis, the success rate of endoscopic procedures for ≤ 1-cm strictures was significantly higher than that for >1-cm ones [odds ratio (OR), 8.65; 95% confidence interval (CI), 3.53-21.21; P < 0.00001]. In addition, the success rate in cases with strictures of the right side was relatively higher than that in cases with strictures of the left side (OR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.05-2.81; P = 0.03). Conclusion: Our pooled studies showed that endoscopic operation is feasible and associated with a moderate success rate along with a relatively low incidence of perioperative complications in the treatment of UES, especially with length ≤ 1 cm and right side. Although there is still no consensus on endoscopic technique for UES regarding balloon dilatation, stent insertion, and laser vaporization, we believe that endoscopic management is a safety and available approach for UES with close follow-up.

Combined antegrade and retrograde endoscopic treatment of complete ureteroenteric obstruction following cystectomy with ileal conduit: A case report

Management of ureteroenteric anastomotic stricture after urinary diversion remains challenging. Although open surgical repair is the gold standard procedure, less invasive endourological intervention is often preferred. In the event of complete obstruction of anastomosis, combined simultaneous antegrade and retrograde endoscopic treatment is required to achieve through-and-through access. Herein we report a case of complete obstruction of ureteroenteric anastomosis following cystectomy with ileal conduit. The cut-to-the-light method was used with a combination of a percutaneous antegrade flexible ureteroscope and a retrograde flexible cystoscope. A holmium:YAG laser incision was made along the full length of the stricture, and through-and-through access was achieved.

Uretero-Enteric Anastomotic Stricture Following Radical Cystectomy: A Comparison of Open, Robotic Extracorporeal, and Robotic Intracorporeal Approaches

OBJECTIVES

To compare the incidence of benign uretero-enteric anastomotic strictures between open cystectomy, robotic cystectomy with extracorporeal urinary diversion, and robotic cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion. The effect of surgeon learning curve on stricture incidence following intracorporeal diversion was investigated as a secondary outcome.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent radical cystectomy at an academic hospital between 2011 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. The primary outcome, incidence of anastomotic stricture over time, was assessed by a multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. A Cox regression model adjusting for sequential case number in a surgeon's experience was used to assess intracorporeal learning curve.

RESULTS

Nine hundred sixty-eight patients were included: 279 open, 382 robotic extracorporeal, and 307 robotic intracorporeal. Benign stricture incidence was 11.3% overall: 26 (9.3%) after open, 43 (11.3%) after robotic extracorporeal, and 40 (13.0%) after robotic intracorporeal. An intracorporeal approach was associated with anastomotic stricture on multivariable analysis (HR 1.66; P = .05). After 75 intracorporeal cases, stricture incidence declined from 17.5% to 4.9%. Higher sequential case volume was independently associated with reduced stricture incidence (Hazard Ratio per 10 cases: 0.90; P = .02).

CONCLUSION

An intracorporeal approach to urinary reconstruction following robotic radical cystectomy was associated with an increased risk of benign uretero-enteric anastomotic stricture. In surgeons' early experience with intracorporeal diversion the difference in stricture incidence was more pronounced compared to alternative approaches; however, increased intracorporeal case volume was associated with a decline in stricture incidence leading to a modest difference between the 3 surgical approaches overall.