1
|
You Y, Gao X, Chai S, Chen J, Wang J, Zhang H, Zhou Y, Yu Z, Cheng G, Li B, Xiao X. Oral mucosal graft ureteroplasty versus ileal ureteric replacement: a meta-analysis. BJU Int 2023; 132:122-131. [PMID: 36815226 DOI: 10.1111/bju.15994] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/24/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To describe outcomes of oral mucosal graft ureteroplasty (OMGU) and ileal ureter replacement (IUR) and determine the relative merits of both procedures. METHODS Databases (including PubMed, Embase and Cochrane) were interrogated for eligible trials that assessed outcomes of OMGU or IUR from 2000 to 30 July 2022. The variables analysed were reconstruction success rates, stricture length, hospital stays, perioperative complications and long-term complications. RESULTS A total of 23 single-arm studies were included. The pooled reconstruction success rates for OMGU and IUR were 94.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 91.0%-97.7%) and 85.8% (95% CI 81.0%-90.0%), respectively. Stricture length of patients in the OMGU and IUR groups were 3.73 (95% CI 3.17-4.28) and 11.55 (95% CI 9.82-13.29) cm, respectively. The maximal stricture length repaired by OMGU was 8 cm. The hospital stays were 5.85 (95% CI 3.88-7.82) and 11.55 (95% CI 6.93-16.17) days in the OMGU and IUR groups, respectively. The incidences of low-grade postoperative complications were 13.6% (95% CI 6.9%-20.3%) and 27.3% (95% CI 19.5%-35.1%), high-grade postoperative complications were 4.6% (95% CI 1.8I-8.5%) and 13.0% (95% CI 9.4%-17.1%), and long-term complications (occurred at > 3months) were 9.0% (95% CI 1.7%-20.0%) and 35.4% (95% CI 25.8%-45.6%) in the OMGU and IUR groups, respectively. CONCLUSION An OMGU is an effective, minimally invasive, and safe alternative to IUR for the management of long ureteric strictures. OMGU was the preferred treatment for long ureteric strictures, especially obstructed ureter segments of ≤8 cm.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yongqiang You
- Department of Urology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Xincheng Gao
- Department of Urology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Shuaishuai Chai
- Department of Urology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Jiawei Chen
- Department of Urology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Jianli Wang
- Department of Urology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Hao Zhang
- Department of Urology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Yuancheng Zhou
- Department of Urology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Zehao Yu
- Department of Urology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Gong Cheng
- Department of Urology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Bing Li
- Department of Urology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Xingyuan Xiao
- Department of Urology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Robotic versus laparoscopic ureteroplasty with a lingual mucosa graft for complex ureteral stricture. Int Urol Nephrol 2023; 55:597-604. [PMID: 36327006 DOI: 10.1007/s11255-022-03385-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2022] [Accepted: 09/29/2022] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Ureteroplasty with a lingual mucosa graft (LMG) for complex ureteral stricture was reported promising. We aimed to compare outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic ureteroplasty using a LMG (RU-LMG vs. LU-LMG, respectively). METHODS From October 2018 to January 2021, 32 ureteroplasties using LMGs were performed by one experienced surgeon, including 16 robotic and laparoscopic procedures each. Patient demographics and peri-operative, post-operative, and follow-up data were prospectively collected and compared. RESULTS The robotic group had a higher rate of previous reconstruction than the laparoscopic group (62.50% vs. 18.75%; p = 0.012). The stricture length was significantly longer in the robotic group (4.8 ± 1.2 cm) than the laparoscopic group (3.7 ± 1.2 cm; p = 0.013). All procedures were completed successfully without open conversion. The operative time was shorter in the robotic group (192 ± 54 min) than the laparoscopic group (254 ± 46 min; p = 0.001). The robotic group had a shorter length of post-operative stay (6.1 ± 2.4 d vs. 8.9 ± 4.3 d; p = 0.033) but a higher hospital cost (76,801 ± 17,974 vs. 42,214 ± 15,757 RMB; p < 0.001) than the laparoscopic group. The mean follow-up time was 21 ± 7 months for the robotic group and 29 ± 9 months for the laparoscopic group respectively (p = 0.014). No difference was detected in the success rate (93.75% and 100%, respectively; p = 0.309) and complication rate (18.75% and 31.25%, respectively; p = 0.414) between the robotic and laparoscopic groups. CONCLUSION Both RU-LMG and LU-LMG are feasible, effective, and safe for repair of complex ureteral strictures. RU-LMG had a shorter operative time and a shorter length of post-operative stay but a higher hospital cost.
Collapse
|
3
|
Analysis of the Efficacy and Risk Factors for Failure of Balloon Dilation for Benign Ureteral Stricture. J Clin Med 2023; 12:jcm12041655. [PMID: 36836191 PMCID: PMC9963490 DOI: 10.3390/jcm12041655] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/31/2022] [Revised: 02/14/2023] [Accepted: 02/16/2023] [Indexed: 02/22/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
4
|
Gao W, Zhang L, He Y, Tian T, Li Z, Bai L, Shen Y, Huang C, Wang B, Zhang P, Feng N, Li X, Guo Y, Li X. Analysis of the efficacy and risk factors of surgical treatment of recurrent UPJO in adults. Int Urol Nephrol 2022; 55:1493-1499. [PMID: 36571668 DOI: 10.1007/s11255-022-03439-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/10/2022] [Accepted: 12/04/2022] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND To compare the efficacy of secondary pyeloplasty and balloon dilation and to analyze the risk factors for secondary surgical failure in patients with recurrent uretero-pelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). METHODS We retrospectively analyzed 65 patients with recurrent UPJO who underwent secondary surgery between September 2011 and March 2019, of whom 33 had complete baseline data and follow-up data. General clinical information, perioperative data, and follow-up results were collected from patients. Risk factors for surgical failure in patients with recurrent UPJO were analyzed using logistic regression. RESULTS The failure rates of secondary pyeloplasty and balloon dilation in secondary surgery were 16.7% and 33.3%, respectively. Univariate analysis showed that ureteral stenosis length and operative time were associated with secondary pyeloplasty and balloon dilatation failure (p < 0.05), and ureteral stenosis length was an independent risk factor for secondary pyeloplasty failure (OR = 0.074, 95% CI: 0.006-0.864, p = 0.038). In the balloon dilation group, treatment failure rates were significantly lower in patients with stenotic segment lengths less than 1 ± 0.32 cm than in patients with stenotic segment lengths greater than 1 ± 0.32 cm (p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS The secondary pyeloplasty may provide better benefit. Ureteral stricture length is an independent risk factor for failure of secondary pyeloplasty and a potential risk factor for balloon dilatation. Operation time is a potential risk factor for pyeloplasty and balloon dilatation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wenzhi Gao
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No.8 Xishiku Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China
- Department of Urology, The Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Ziqiang Road, Qiaoxi District, Shijiazhuang City, 050000, Hebei Province, China
| | - Lei Zhang
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No.8 Xishiku Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China
| | - Yuhui He
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No.8 Xishiku Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China
| | - Tai Tian
- Department of Urology, The Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Ziqiang Road, Qiaoxi District, Shijiazhuang City, 050000, Hebei Province, China
| | - Zhihua Li
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No.8 Xishiku Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China
| | - Liangliang Bai
- Department of Urology, The Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Ziqiang Road, Qiaoxi District, Shijiazhuang City, 050000, Hebei Province, China
| | - Ying Shen
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No.8 Xishiku Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China
| | - Chen Huang
- Department of Urology, Jian Gong Hospital, Beijing, 100034, China
| | - Bing Wang
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Miyun Campus, Beijing, 100034, China
| | - Peng Zhang
- Department of Urology, Emergency General Hospital, Beijing, 100034, China
| | - Ninghan Feng
- Wuxi No. 2 People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing Medical University, Jiangsu, 214002, China
| | - Xuechao Li
- Department of Urology, The Fifth Medical Centre of Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100034, China
| | - Yuexian Guo
- Department of Urology, The Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Ziqiang Road, Qiaoxi District, Shijiazhuang City, 050000, Hebei Province, China.
| | - Xuesong Li
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No.8 Xishiku Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Fan S, Han G, Li Z, Wang X, Li X, Xiong S, Li D, Zhang J, Meng C, Zhang P, Yang K, Li X, Zhou L. Robot-assisted laparoscopic ileal ureter replacement with extracorporeal ileal segment preparation for long ureteral strictures: a case series. BMC Surg 2022; 22:435. [PMID: 36544120 PMCID: PMC9773509 DOI: 10.1186/s12893-022-01885-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2022] [Accepted: 12/12/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Complete intracorporal robotic ileal ureteric replacement is challenging. We aimed to present the surgical technique of robotic ileal ureter replacement with extracorporeal ileal segment preparation for long ureteral strictures. METHODS From March 2019 to March 2021, 18 patients underwent robotic ileal ureter replacement with extracorporeal ileal segment preparation by one experienced surgeon. The demographic, perioperative, and follow-up data were recorded. Success was defined as the resolution of the presenting symptom, a stable estimated glomerular filtration rate and unobstructive drainage on imaging examination. RESULTS All 18 surgeries were successfully completed without conversion. The median length of the intestinal tube used was 20 (12-30) cm. The median operative time was 248 (170-450) min, the median estimated blood loss was 50 (10-200) ml, and the median postoperative hospital stay was 7 (5-27) days. At a median follow-up of 16 (13-28) months, all patients were symptom-free. No or mild hydronephrosis was confirmed in 17 patients; 1 patient had moderate hydronephrosis without peristalsis of the ileal ureter. The renal function was stable in all patients. The overall success rate was 100%. Postoperative complications, including 4 cases of urinary infections (Grade I), 1 case of an incision hernia (Grade I), 4 cases of kidney stone formation (Grade I), 6 cases of metabolic acidosis (Grade I), 4 cases of incomplete ileus (Grade II), and 1 case of an incision infection (Grade IIIb). CONCLUSIONS Robot-assisted laparoscopic ileal ureter replacement with extracorporeal ileal segment preparation is safe, feasible, and effective for the treatment of long ureteral strictures, especially in high-volume tertiary referral centers with extensive robotic surgery experience capable of managing severe peri-operative complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shubo Fan
- grid.11135.370000 0001 2256 9319Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034 China
| | - GuanPeng Han
- grid.11135.370000 0001 2256 9319Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034 China
| | - Zhihua Li
- grid.411472.50000 0004 1764 1621Nursing Department, Peking University First Hospital, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034 China
| | - Xiang Wang
- grid.11135.370000 0001 2256 9319Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034 China
| | - Xinfei Li
- grid.11135.370000 0001 2256 9319Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034 China
| | - Shengwei Xiong
- grid.11135.370000 0001 2256 9319Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034 China
| | - Dan Li
- grid.411472.50000 0004 1764 1621Nursing Department, Peking University First Hospital, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034 China
| | - Jun Zhang
- grid.411472.50000 0004 1764 1621Nursing Department, Peking University First Hospital, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034 China
| | - Chang Meng
- grid.11135.370000 0001 2256 9319Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034 China
| | - Peng Zhang
- grid.414252.40000 0004 1761 8894Department of Urology, Emergency General Hospital, No. 29, Xibahenanli, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100028 China
| | - Kunlin Yang
- grid.11135.370000 0001 2256 9319Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034 China
| | - Xuesong Li
- grid.11135.370000 0001 2256 9319Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034 China
| | - Liqun Zhou
- grid.11135.370000 0001 2256 9319Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034 China
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
[Trends in upper urinary tract reconstruction surgery over a decade based on a multi-center database]. BEIJING DA XUE XUE BAO. YI XUE BAN = JOURNAL OF PEKING UNIVERSITY. HEALTH SCIENCES 2022; 54. [PMID: 35950394 PMCID: PMC9385503 DOI: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167x.2022.04.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To study the trend of surgical type, surgical procedure and etiological distribution of upper urinary tract repair in recent 10 years. METHODS The preoperative and perioperative variables and follow-up data of upper urinary tract reconstruction surgery in RECUTTER (Reconstruction of Urinary Tract: Technology, Epidemiology and Result) database from 2010 to 2021 were searched, collected and analyzed. The surgical type, surgical procedure, duration of hospitalization, time of operation, incidence of short-term complications, and proportion of the patients undergoing reoperations were compared between the two groups of 2010-2017 period and 2018-2021 period. RESULTS A total of 1 072 patients were included in the RECUTTER database. Congenital factors and iatrogenic injuries were the main causes of upper urinary tract repair. Among them, 129 (12.0%) patients had open operation, 403 (37.6%) patients had laparoscopic surgery, 322 (30.0%) patients had robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery and 218 (20.3%) patients had endourological procedure. In the last decade, the total number of surgeries showed a noticeable increasing annual trend and the proportion of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery in 2018-2021 was significantly higher than that in 2010-2017 (P < 0.001). The 1 072 patients included 124 (11.6%) cases of ileal ureter replacements, 440 (41.1%) cases of pyeloplasty, 229 (21.4%) cases of balloon dilation, 109 (10.2%) cases of ureteral reimplantation, 49 (4.6%) cases of boari flap-Psoas hitch surgery, 60 (5.6%) cases of uretero-ureteral anastomosis, 61 (5.7%) cases of lingual mucosal onlay graft ureteroplasty or appendiceal onlay flap ureteroplasty. Pyeloplasty and balloon dilatation had been the main types of surgery, while the proportion of lingual mucosal onlay graft ureteroplasty plus appendiceal onlay flap ureteroplasty had increased significantly in recent years (P < 0.05). In addition, the time of operation was significantly increased (P < 0.05) after 2018, which was considered to be related to the sharp increase in the proportion of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. We found that minimally invasive surgery (endourological procedure and robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery) as an independent risk factor (P=0.050, OR=0.472) could reduce the incidence of short-term post-operative complications. CONCLUSION We have justified the value of the RECUTTER database, created by the Institute of Urology, Peking University in data support for clinical research work, and provided valuable experience for the construction of other multi-center databases at home and abroad. In recent 10 years, we have observed that, in upper urinary tract reconstruction surgery, the surgery type tends to be minimally invasive and the surgery procedure tends to be complicated, suggesting the superiority of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery.
Collapse
|
7
|
Yang K, Fan S, Wang J, Yin L, Li Z, Xiong S, Han G, Meng C, Zhang P, Li X, Zhou L. Robotic-assisted Lingual Mucosal Graft Ureteroplasty for the Repair of Complex Ureteral Strictures: Technique Description and the Medium-term Outcome. Eur Urol 2022; 81:533-540. [PMID: 35101303 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.01.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2021] [Revised: 12/07/2021] [Accepted: 01/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Robot-assisted autologous graft ureteroplasty provides another treatment option for complex ureteral strictures, circumventing ileal ureter or renal autotransplantation. OBJECTIVE To report the medium-term outcome of robotic ureteroplasty with a lingual mucosal graft (RU-LMG) for managing complex ureteral strictures. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Between June 2019 and September 2020, 12 patients underwent RU-LMG. The perioperative variables were prospectively collected, and the outcomes were assessed. SURGICAL PROCEDURE After ureteral stricture dissection, the narrow segment was cut longitudinally, and a lingual mucosal graft (LMG) of the required length was harvested, followed by double-J stent placement and LMG ventral onlay anastomosis. If the diseased ureter required transection, posteriorly augmented ureteral anastomosis could be performed before LMG harvest. Finally, the anastomotic area was wrapped by the omental flap. MEASUREMENTS A descriptive statistical analysis was performed. The criteria for complete success included the absence of both clinical symptoms and obstruction on radiography. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Seven patients (58%) had a history of failed ureteral reconstruction. The mean (range) stricture length was 4.7 (3-6.5) cm, LMG length was 4.4 (3-7) cm, LMG width was 1.5 (1-2) cm, operative duration was 197.1 (130-346) min, estimated blood loss was 49.2 (10-200) ml, and the duration of postoperative hospitalization was 6 (4-14) d. No open conversions and intraoperative complications occurred. The median follow-up time was 15 mo (range: 13-27 mo). The overall success rate was 92% (11/12). CONCLUSIONS These medium-term follow-up results demonstrate that RU-LMG is a safe and feasible technique for repairing ureteral strictures. PATIENT SUMMARY Our study proves that robotic ureteroplasty with a lingual mucosal graft is a safe and feasible technique for ureteral reconstruction that can serve as another choice for managing long, complex ureteral strictures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kunlin Yang
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China; Institute of Urology, Peking University, Beijing, China; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Shubo Fan
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China; Institute of Urology, Peking University, Beijing, China; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Jie Wang
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China; Institute of Urology, Peking University, Beijing, China; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Lu Yin
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China; Institute of Urology, Peking University, Beijing, China; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Zhihua Li
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China; Institute of Urology, Peking University, Beijing, China; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Shengwei Xiong
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China; Institute of Urology, Peking University, Beijing, China; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Guanpeng Han
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China; Institute of Urology, Peking University, Beijing, China; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Chang Meng
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China; Institute of Urology, Peking University, Beijing, China; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Peng Zhang
- Department of Urology, Emergency General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Xuesong Li
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China; Institute of Urology, Peking University, Beijing, China; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China.
| | - Liqun Zhou
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China; Institute of Urology, Peking University, Beijing, China; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Wang J, Fan S, Guan H, Xiong S, Zhang D, Huang B, Wang X, Zhu H, Li Z, Xiong G, Zhang Z, Yang K, Li X, Zhou L. Should ureteroscopy be performed for patients after ureteral reconstruction with autologous onlay flap/graft? Transl Androl Urol 2021; 10:3737-3744. [PMID: 34804817 PMCID: PMC8575567 DOI: 10.21037/tau-21-583] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/02/2021] [Accepted: 08/26/2021] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
Background To analyze the safety and clinical significance of performing ureteroscopy after ureteral reconstruction with autologous onlay/graft. To describe the ureteroscopic appearances of the appendiceal onlay flap and lingual mucosa graft. Methods Beginning in August 2018, we conducted a prospective cohort study of autologous onlay/graft techniques to repair ureteral strictures. The perioperative data of 42 patients who had undergone surgery more than 6 months prior were collected prospectively. During the postoperative follow-up, ureteroscopy was performed in 27 patients (64.3%) after surgery (group A), and ureteroscopy was not performed in the other 15 patients (35.7%) (group B). We carried out a comparative study of these two groups of patients. Analyses were conducted mainly on complications related to ureteroscopy and the success rate of ureteral reconstruction surgery. Results There were no significant differences in patient demographic data or the length of ureteral reconstruction between the two groups (P>0.05). For the ureteroscopy group, the median time from repair surgery to ureteroscopy was 3 (range, 2-7) months, there was no poor healing of the anastomosis, and the ureteral lumen of all patients was unobstructed. Some expected observations can be found in the ureteral lumen, such as mucosa edema, stones, follicles and granulation tissue. Among the 27 patients, one patient (3.7%) developed bleeding intraoperatively and 7 patients (25.9%) were found to have low-grade (Clavien-Dindo I and II) postoperative complications, including 5 cases of fever and 2 cases of bleeding. The mean follow-up times of patients in group A and group B were 16.7±6.4 and 19.0±10.1 months, respectively. The objective success (imaging showed hydronephrosis ease) rate of the two groups was 100%. The subjective success (symptom relief) rates of group A and group B were 96.3% and 100%, respectively. Conclusions Patients after autologous onlay flap/graft ureteroplasty do not need to undergo routine ureteroscopy unless there is aggravation of hydronephrosis or other indications for ureteroscopy, such as stones.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jie Wang
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Shubo Fan
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Hua Guan
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Shengwei Xiong
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Dengxiang Zhang
- Department of Urology, Beijing Jiangong Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Bingwei Huang
- Department of Urology, Emergency General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Xiang Wang
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Hongjian Zhu
- Department of Urology, Beijing Jiangong Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Zhihua Li
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Gengyan Xiong
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Zhongyuan Zhang
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Kunlin Yang
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Xuesong Li
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Liqun Zhou
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Wang J, Zhang B, Fan J, Cheng S, Fan S, Yin L, Li Z, Guan H, Yang K, Li X. The application of the "omental wrapping" technique with autologous onlay flap/graft ureteroplasty for the management of long ureteral strictures. Transl Androl Urol 2021; 10:2871-2878. [PMID: 34430389 PMCID: PMC8350257 DOI: 10.21037/tau-21-305] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/11/2021] [Accepted: 05/25/2021] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Background To present our experience with the "omental wrapping" technique in laparoscopic and robotic ureteroplasty using onlay flaps or grafts for the management of long proximal or middle ureteral strictures. Methods This is a retrospective review of 25 patients with long proximal or middle ureteral strictures who underwent laparoscopic and robotic onlay flaps or grafts ureteroplasty using an omental flap to reinforce an anastomosis site between August 2018 and November 2019. Perioperative and follow-up data were collected. Results Sixteen laparoscopic procedures and nine robotic procedures were performed successfully. Sixteen patients underwent ureteroplasty with lingual mucosal graft (LMG), and nine patients with appendiceal onlay flap (AOF). The median stricture length was 4 cm (range, 2-6 cm). The mean operative time (OT) was 220.5±50.6 min, the estimated blood loss (EBL) was 66.0±38.9 mL, and the length of hospital stay (LHS) was 8.0±3.6 days. In the LMG group, four patients had tongue numbing and one had an oral ulcer, which relieved itself gradually without intervention. Two patients in the LMG group and four patients in the AOF group experienced urinary tract infection, and all responded well to antibiotic treatment. There were no complications attributed to "omental wrapping". The mean follow-up was 16.3±4.8 months. According to the standards regarding improvement in clinical symptoms, relief of obstruction radiologically and a stable estimate glomerular filtration rate, our surgical success rate was 100%. Conclusions The "omental wrapping" technique in laparoscopic and robotic onlay flaps or grafts ureteroplasty for long proximal or middle ureteral strictures is an efficient, safe, reproducible and simple technique.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jie Wang
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Baiyu Zhang
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China
| | - Jian Fan
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Sida Cheng
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Shubo Fan
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Lu Yin
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Zhihua Li
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Hua Guan
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Kunlin Yang
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| | - Xuesong Li
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Gn M, Sterling J, Sinkin J, Cancian M, Elsamra S. The Expanding Use of Buccal Mucosal Grafts in Urologic Surgery. Urology 2021; 156:e58-e65. [PMID: 34097942 DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2021.05.039] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2021] [Revised: 05/07/2021] [Accepted: 05/27/2021] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
The advent and success of buccal mucosal grafts as a substitution material in the urinary tract has changed the landscape of reconstructive urology. Due to its ease to harvest, low morbidity, and advantageous properties, there has been a growing number of applications for buccal mucosal grafts in upper and lower urinary tract reconstruction as well as genital reconstruction. In this article, we review the historical application and the evolution of buccal mucosal grafts and provide an up-to-date review on its utilization in urologic procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martus Gn
- Department of Urology, Warren Alpert Medical School, Providence, RI.
| | - Joshua Sterling
- Department of Urology, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Jeremy Sinkin
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Madeline Cancian
- Department of Urology, Warren Alpert Medical School, Providence, RI
| | - Sammy Elsamra
- Department of Urology, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Cheng S, Fan S, Wang J, Xiong S, Li X, Xu Y, Li Z, Guan H, Zhang P, Zhu H, Huang C, Zhang L, Yang K, Li X, Zhou L. Laparoscopic and robotic ureteroplasty using onlay flap or graft for the management of long proximal or middle ureteral strictures: our experience and strategy. Int Urol Nephrol 2020; 53:479-488. [PMID: 33037521 DOI: 10.1007/s11255-020-02679-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2020] [Accepted: 10/05/2020] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To present our experience of laparoscopic and robotic ureteroplasty using onlay flap or graft for the management of long proximal or middle ureteral strictures and summarize our treatment strategies for these challenging scenarios. METHODS From March 2018 to January 2020, 53 patients with long proximal/middle ureteral strictures (2-6 cm) who underwent laparoscopic or robotic onlay flap/graft ureteroplasty were retrospectively enrolled. Different reconstruction techniques were chosen based on our management strategy: pelvic flap (PF) was the first choice for proximal stricture if pelvic tissue was sufficient for repair, while appendiceal flap (AF) was preferred over oral mucosa graft for both proximal and middle strictures. RESULTS A total of 28 PFs, 9 AFs and 16 lingual mucosa grafts (LMGs) onlay ureteroplasty were performed successfully, with 33 laparoscopic procedures and 20 robotic procedures being undertaken. No intraoperative complications or conversion occurred. The median stricture length was 4 cm (range 2-6 cm). Compared with laparoscopic procedures, robotic procedures showed significantly shorter operative time (P = 0.008), shorter postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.011) but higher hospital cost (P < 0.001). At a mean follow-up of 12.8 months, the overall success rate was 94.3%. There was no difference in postoperative complications or the success rate between the approaches. CONCLUSION Laparoscopic and robotic onlay flap/graft ureteroplasty can be safe and feasible to repair long proximal/middle ureteral strictures while robotic procedures showed higher efficiency, faster recovery but higher cost. Our algorithmic strategies may provide beneficial references for their standardization and dissemination into clinical care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sida Cheng
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China
| | - Shubo Fan
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China
| | - Jie Wang
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China
| | - Shengwei Xiong
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China
| | - Xinfei Li
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China
| | - Yangyang Xu
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China
| | - Zhihua Li
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China
| | - Hua Guan
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China
| | - Peng Zhang
- Department of Urology, Emergency General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Hongjian Zhu
- Department of Urology, Beijing Jiangong Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Chen Huang
- Department of Urology, Beijing Jiangong Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Lei Zhang
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China
| | - Kunlin Yang
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China.
| | - Xuesong Li
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China.
| | - Liqun Zhou
- Department of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, No. 8 Xishiku St, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, China
| |
Collapse
|