Long-term outcome of secondary endopyelotomy after failed primary intervention for ureteropelvic junction obstruction

A review of complications after ureteral reconstruction

Objective

This study aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of the complications unique to ureteral reconstruction in adults, emphasizing their presentation, diagnosis, and management in the treatment of ureteral structure disease.

Methods

This review involves an in-depth analysis of existing literature and case studies pertaining to ureteral reconstruction, with a focus on examining the range of complications that can arise post-surgery. Special attention is given to the presentation of each complication, the diagnostic process involved, and the subsequent management strategies.

Results

Ureteral reconstruction can treat ureteral stricture disease with low morbidity; however, complications, although uncommon, can have severe consequences. The most notable complications include urinary extravasation, stricture recurrence, urinary tract infections, compartment syndrome, symptomatic vesicoureteral reflux, and Boari flap necrosis. Each complication presents unique diagnostic challenges and requires specific management approaches.

Conclusion

Ureteral reconstruction is a highly effective treatment for ureteral stricture disease. Having a strong understanding of the potential complications that patients may experience following ureteral reconstruction is not only critical to adequately counsel patients but also facilitate prompt diagnosis and management of complications when they arise.

Robotic ureteral reconstruction for recurrent strictures after prior failed management

Objectives

To describe our multi-institutional experience with robotic ureteral reconstruction (RUR) in patients who failed prior endoscopic and/or surgical management.

Materials and Methods

We retrospectively reviewed our Collaborative of Reconstructive Robotic Ureteral Surgery (CORRUS) database for all consecutive patients who underwent RUR between 05/2012 and 01/2020 for a recurrent ureteral stricture after having undergone prior failed endoscopic and/or surgical repair. Post-operatively, patients were assessed for surgical success, defined as the absence of flank pain and obstruction on imaging.

Results

Overall, 105 patients met inclusion criteria. Median stricture length was 2 (IQR 1-3) centimetres. Strictures were located at the ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) (41.0%), proximal (14.3%), middle (9.5%) or distal (35.2%) ureter. There were nine (8.6%) radiation-induced strictures. Prior failed management included endoscopic intervention (49.5%), surgical repair (25.7%) or both (24.8%). For repair of UPJ and proximal strictures, ureteroureterostomy (3.4%), ureterocalicostomy (5.2%), pyeloplasty (53.5%) or buccal mucosa graft ureteroplasty (37.9%) was utilized; for repair of middle strictures, ureteroureterostomy (20.0%) or buccal mucosa graft ureteroplasty (80.0%) was utilized; for repair of distal strictures, ureteroureterostomy (8.1%), side-to-side reimplant (18.9%), end-to-end reimplant (70.3%) or appendiceal bypass (2.7%) was utilized. Major (Clavien >2) post-operative complications occurred in two (1.9%) patients. At a median follow-up of 15.1 (IQR 5.0-30.4) months, 94 (89.5%) cases were surgically successful.

Conclusions

RUR may be performed with good intermediate-term outcomes for patients with recurrent strictures after prior failed endoscopic and/or surgical management.

Redo laparoscopic pyeloplasty for recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction: Propensity score matched analyses of a high-volume center

PURPOSE

Review the experience of redo laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RLP) in patients with recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) in comparison to primary laparoscopic pyeloplasty (PLP) and redo open pyeloplasty (ROP), and determine the feasibility and effectiveness of RLP for recurrent UPJO in children.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of patients treated with transperitoneal PLP, RLP, and ROP for UPJO from December 2015 to December 2022. The Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance confounding variables. RLP patients were 1:4 matched with PLP and 1:3 matched with ROP. The primary outcomes were failure and post-operative complications. Complications were classified according to the Clavien-Dindo grading system.

RESULTS

The study included ten patients who underwent RLP, 43 patients who underwent ROP, and 412 patients who underwent PLP. The follow-up time ranged from 6 to 36 months in the RLP group, 12 to 60 months in the PLP group, and 24 to 54 months in the ROP group. In the RLP group, no failure but three post-operative complications (Clavien grade II) were observed during the follow-up. Compared with the PLP group, the older age, higher weight, larger pre-operative anteroposterior diameter (APD) and APD/cortical thickness (P/C ratio), longer operation time, and post-operative length of stay (LOS) in the RLP group (P < 0.05). After PSM, longer operation time and post-operative LOS were observed in the RLP group (P < 0.05). Compared with the ROP group, the older age, higher weight, and longer post-operative LOS in the RLP group (P < 0.05). After PSM, longer post-operative LOS was observed in the ROP group (P < 0.05). The failure and complication rates were comparable between RLP and PLP or RLP and ROP (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our result demonstrated that RLP performed as well as PLP except for a longer operation time. Compared with ROP, RLP has the advantages of a clearer surgical view, sufficient exposure, clearer anatomical landmark position, and minor trauma with a comparable clinical outcome. On experienced hands, RLP for recurrent UPJO after is a safe and effective procedure and should be considered an excellent alternative to the more commonly recommended ROP in select patients.

Primary vs redo robotic pyeloplasty: A comparison of outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) is a safe and efficacious option for repair of UPJO. We hypothesize that redo-RALP is technically more difficult but has comparable outcomes to primary RALP.

METHODS

An IRB-approved single institutional registry was utilized to identify all patients undergoing primary or redo RALP from 2012 to 2019. Redo RALP consisted of pyeloplasty and ureterocalicostomy (RALUC). Peri-operative and post-operative details and outcomes were aggregated. Successful reconstruction was defined as resolution of symptoms, improved hydronephrosis and no need for additional procedures.

RESULTS

From 399 patients who underwent UPJO repair at our center, a total of 306 with a median age of 4.9 years at surgery and a median follow-up of 18.5 months were included: 276 primary and 30 redo (21 RALP and 9 RALUC). Redo group had significantly longer procedure time and length of stay compared to the primary group. However, no significant difference was noted in the post-operative complications, need for additional endoscopic procedures or redo reconstruction, and success between the two groups. Multivariate analysis showed that when controlled for age, gender, 30-days post-operative complication and anatomy of obstruction, redo as compared to primary reconstruction did not have a significant effect on success.

DISCUSSION

This study is the largest controlled cohort in the pediatric population comparing redo RALP with an established control group -primary RALP. This retrospective chart review possesses the biases innate to any retrospective study. The low number of re-operative cases as well as low rate of failure in redo RALP further complicates identification of statistically significant predictors of outcomes following redo RALP.

CONCLUSION

Redo RALP is an efficient and safe approach for reconstruction of recurrent UPJO, with low complication rate and high success rate, comparable to primary RALP.

Multi-institutional Experience Comparing Outcomes of Adult Patients Undergoing Secondary Versus Primary Robotic Pyeloplasty

OBJECTIVE

To describe surgical techniques and peri-operative outcomes with secondary robotic pyeloplasty (RP), and compare them to those of primary RP.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed our multi-institutional, collaborative of reconstructive robotic ureteral surgery (CORRUS) database for all consecutive patients who underwent RP between April 2012 and September 2019. Patients were grouped according to whether they underwent a primary or secondary pyeloplasty (performed for a recurrent stricture after previously failed pyeloplasty). Perioperative outcomes and surgical techniques were compared using nonparametric independent sample median tests and chi-square tests; P < .05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Of 158 patients, 28 (17.7%) and 130 (82.3%) underwent secondary and primary RP, respectively. Secondary RP, compared to primary RP, was associated with a higher median estimated blood loss (100.0 vs 50.0 milliliters, respectively; P < .01) and longer operative time (188.0 vs 136.0 minutes, respectively; P = .02). There was no difference in major (Clavien >2) complications (P = .29). At a median follow-up of 21.1 (IQR: 11.8-34.7) months, there was no difference in success between secondary and primary RP groups (85.7% vs 92.3%, respectively; P = .44). Buccal mucosa graft onlay ureteroplasty was performed more commonly (35.7% vs 0.0%, respectively, P < .01) and near-infrared fluorescence imaging with indocyanine green was utilized more frequently (67.9% vs 40.8%, respectively; P < .01) for secondary vs primary repair.

CONCLUSION

Although performing secondary RP is technically challenging, it is a safe and effective method for recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction after a previously failed pyeloplasty. Buccal mucosa graft onlay ureteroplasty and utilization of near-infrared fluorescence with indocyanine green may be particularly useful in the re-operative setting.

Risk Factors and Management Options for the Adult Failed Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction Repair in the Era of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Approaches: A Comprehensive Literature Review

Guidelines for the management of pyeloplasty failure remain elusive given the rarity of this condition and the difficulty of integrating and analyzing reported outcomes given the varying definition of failures. In this article, we aim to review the existing literature on risk factors that may influence the surgical outcomes of reconstructive pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Furthermore, we discuss management options and review success outcomes of treatment options for patients with pyeloplasty failure.

Laser Endopyelotomy in the Management of Pelviureteric Junction Obstruction in Adults: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Laser endopyelotomy (LEP) is considered as an option for the treatment of pelviureteric junction obstruction in adults. A comprehensive systematic search of the published literature was performed to assess the success rate and perioperative complications of LEP in the treatment of primary and secondary pelviureteric junction obstruction and to identify the factors that may have an impact on the success of LEP. The evidence available has significant limitations in terms of the heterogeneous study design and the definitions of outcomes. The average overall success rate of the pooled data was 75% with a mean follow-up of 29 months. Complications were predominately minor with an average rate of 12.5%.

Laparoscopic pyeloplasty versus open pyeloplasty for recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) in children is an operative challenge. Minimally invasive endourological treatment options for secondary UPJO have suboptimal success rates; hence, there is a re-emergence of interest about redo pyeloplasty. The present study presented experience with laparoscopic management of previously failed pyeloplasty compared with open redo pyeloplasty in children.

STUDY DESIGN

Twenty-four children with recurrent UPJO who underwent transperitoneal dismembered laparoscopic pyeloplasty were studied. Operative, postoperative, and follow-up functional details were recorded and compared with those of open pyeloplasty (n = 15) carried out for recurrent UPJO by the same surgeon during the same study period.

RESULTS

Demographic data were comparable in the laparoscopic and open groups, except for a significantly lower GFR in the open group (24.8 vs 38.2 ml/min, P = 0.0001). Mean time to failure of the original repair was 20.2 months (23.6 months for redo laparoscopic pyeloplasty, 18.8 months for redo open). The success rate of laparoscopic redo pyeloplasty was 91.7 vs 100% in open redo pyeloplasty. Compared with redo open pyeloplasty, the mean operative time was longer (211.4 ± 32.2 vs 148.8 ± 16.6, P = 0.002), estimated blood loss was higher (102 vs 75 ml, P = 0.06), while hospital stay was shorter and pain score was lower in the laparoscopy group (P = 0.02) in the laparoscopic group. There were no intraoperative complications, while the postoperative complication rate was similar in the two groups (20.8 vs 20.0%).

DISCUSSION

Before the laparoscopic approach became a viable option, endopyelotomy was widely used for managing recurrent UPJO. However, the success rate of endopyelotomy for secondary UPJO was approximately 10-25% lower than for open pyeloplasty. Redo pyeloplasty had excellent results, with reported success rates of 77.8-100%. Laparoscopic redo pyeloplasty is becoming a viable alternative to open redo pyeloplasty in many centers with experience in minimally invasive techniques. The present study revealed that redo laparoscopic pyeloplasty appeared to have advantages over redo open surgery, in that it was associated with shorter hospital stay (4 vs 6 days, P = 0.046), reduced postoperative pain score (P = 0.02), and less need for postoperative analgesia (P = 0.001), still with comparable successful outcomes and patient safety. However, the procedure had a longer operative times and more blood loss.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic pyeloplasty is a viable alternative to open pyeloplasty in children with recurrent UPJO, with shorter hospital stays and less postoperative pain. However, the procedure is technically demanding and should be attempted in high-volume centers by laparoscopists with considerable experience in laparoscopic reconstructive procedures.

Definitive Management of Failure After Pyeloplasty

INTRODUCTION

Failure after pyeloplasty is difficult to manage. We report our experience managing pyeloplasty failures.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the case log of a single surgeon, from August 1996 to August 2014, to identify all patients undergoing a surgical procedure after failed pyeloplasty. We excluded patients without follow-up exceeding 1 year from initial postpyeloplasty procedure. Failure was defined as a need for additional definitive intervention.

RESULTS

Of 247 laparoscopic pyeloplasties, 68 endopyelotomies and 305 simple laparoscopic nephrectomies reviewed, 41 were performed after previous pyeloplasty and had sufficient follow-up. Laparoscopic nephrectomy was performed in nine patients. All three secondary laparoscopic pyeloplasties were successful. Of 29 secondary endopyelotomies, 10 (34%) were successful. Of the 19 failures after secondary endopyelotomy, 12 patients had tertiary pyeloplasty (5 laparoscopic and 7 open surgical), 5 (26%) underwent tertiary endopyelotomy, and 2 (11%) required nephrectomy. Our overall endopyelotomy success rate was 38% (13/34) vs 100% (11/11) for secondary or tertiary pyeloplasty (4 patients lost to follow-up). Median time to failure was 5 months for endopyelotomy. Median follow-up for patients free from intervention was 40.2 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Secondary pyeloplasty (including both laparoscopic and open surgical approach) is more than twice as successful as endopyelotomy after failed pyeloplasty. Secondary pyeloplasty is an excellent alternative to endopyelotomy in select patients with failure after initial pyeloplasty.

National Trends in Secondary Procedures Following Pediatric Pyeloplasty

PURPOSE

Although reported success rates after pediatric pyeloplasty to correct ureteropelvic junction are high, failure may require intervention. We sought to characterize the incidence and timing of secondary procedures after pediatric pyeloplasty using a national employer based insurance database.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the MarketScan® database we identified patients 0 to 18 years old who underwent pyeloplasty from 2007 to 2013 with greater than 3 months of postoperative enrollment. Secondary procedures following the index pyeloplasty were identified by CPT codes and classified as stent/drain, endoscopic, pyeloplasty, nephrectomy or transplant. The risk of undergoing a secondary procedure was ascertained using Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

We identified 1,976 patients with a mean ± SD followup of 23.9 ± 19.8 months. Overall 226 children (11.4%) had undergone at least 1 post-pyeloplasty procedure. The first procedure was done within 1 year in 87.2% of patients with a mean postoperative interval of 5.9 ± 11.1 months. Stents/drains, endoscopic procedures and pyeloplasties were noted in 116 (5.9%), 34 (1.7%) and 71 patients (3.1%), respectively. Length of stay was associated with undergoing a secondary procedure. Compared with 2 days or less the HR of 3 to 5 and 6 days or greater was 1.65 and 3.94 (p = 0.001 and <0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Following pediatric pyeloplasty 1 of 9 patients undergoes at least 1 secondary procedure with the majority performed within the first year. One of 11 patients undergoes intervention more extensive than placement of a single stent or drain, requiring management strategies that generally signify recurrent or persistent obstruction. Estimates of pyeloplasty success in this national data set are lower than in other published series.

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic approaches to the ureter: Pyeloplasty and ureteral reimplantation

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

The benefits of robotic surgery when compared to standard laparoscopy have been well established, especially when it comes to reconstructive procedures. The application of robotic technology to laparoscopic pyeloplasty has reduced the steep learning curve associated with the procedure. Consequently, this has allowed surgeons who are less experienced with laparoscopy to offer this treatment to their patients, instead of referring them to centers of excellence. Robotic pyeloplasty has also proved useful for repairing secondary UPJO, a procedure which is considered extremely difficult using a conventional laparoscopic approach. Finally, the pursuit of scarless surgery has seen the development of laparoendoscopic single site (LESS) procedures. The application of robotics to LESS (R-LESS) has also reduced the difficulty in performing conventional LESS pyeloplasty. Herein we present a literature review with regards to robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty. We also discuss the benefits of robotic surgery with regards to reconstruction of the lower urinary tract.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed using PubMed to identify relevant studies. There were no time restrictions applied to the search, but only studies in English were included. We utilized the following search terms: Ureteropelvic junction obstruction and laparoscopy; laparoscopic pyeloplasty; robotic pyeloplasty; robotic ureteric reimplantation; robotic ureteroneocystostomy; robotic boari flap; robotic psoas hitch.

RESULTS

There has been considerable experience in the literature with robotic pyeloplasty. Unfortunately, no prospective randomized studies have been conducted, however there are a number of meta analyses and systematic reviews. While there are no clear benefits when it comes to surgical and functional outcomes when compared to standard laparoscopic pyeloplasty, it is clear that robotics makes the operation easier to perform. There is also a benefit to the robotic approach when performing a redo-pyeloplasty. Robotic pyeloplasty has also been applied to the pediatric population, and there may be a benefit in older children while in very young patients, retroperitoneal open pyeloplasty is still the gold standard. In the field of single incision surgery R-LESS is technically easier to perform than conventional LESS. However, the design of the current robotic platform is not completely suited for this application, limiting its utility and often requiring a larger incision. Optimized R-LESS specific technology is awaited. What is clear, from a number of analyses, is that robotic pyeloplasty is considerably more expensive than the laparoscopic approach, largely due to costs of instrumentation and the capital expense of the robot. Until cheaper robotic technology is available, this technique will continue to be expensive, and a cost-benefit analysis must be undertaken by each hospital planning to undertake this surgery. Finally, the benefits of upper tract reconstruction apply equally to the lower tract although there is considerably less experience. However, there have been a number of studies demonstrating the technical feasibility of ureteral reimplantation.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty is gaining popularity, likely due to the shorter learning curve, greater surgeon comfort, and easier intracorporeal suturing. This has allowed more surgeons to perform the procedure, improving accessibility. Robotic technology is also beneficial in the field of LESS. Nevertheless, the procedure still is not as cost-effective as the conventional laparoscopic approach, and until more affordable robotic technology is available, it will not be universally offered.

Laparoscopic ureterocalicostomy for complicated upper urinary tract obstruction: mid-term follow-up

PURPOSE

To report on the largest series of laparoscopic ureterocalicostomies done for complicated upper urinary obstruction.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the data from 6 transperitoneal laparoscopic ureterocalicostomies performed in our institution from January 2008 to January 2012. Symptomatic complicated upper urinary obstruction was the main reason for all the procedures. The recorded data included age, gender, clinical presentation, duration of symptoms, laterality, mean operative time, hospital stay, complications and clinical and functional outcomes.

RESULTS

The median patient age was 20.1 (2-44) years, and all patients were females. Patients underwent laparoscopic ureterocalicostomy due to previous failed procedures (3 patients), anatomic abnormalities (2 patients) and a severe upper ureteral stenosis (1 patient). The median operative time was 215 (180-270) min. There were no major complications. There were no conversions to open surgery. In a median follow-up of 30 (8-56) months, all patients presented with clinical and radiological improvement with no signs of obstruction. In all cases, the postoperative renal scintigraphy revealed a T1/2 lower than 10 min.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic ureterocalicostomy is feasible and associated with high success rate in well-selected cases with complicated upper urinary obstructions.

Analysis of robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyleloplasty for primary versus secondary repair in 119 consecutive cases

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the outcomes of our robotic-assisted pyeloplasty series for primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) and compare them with our series of robotic-assisted pyeloplasty for secondary UPJO. The repair of secondary UPJO can pose additional challenges to surgeons. Robotic assistance could aid in these repairs.

METHODS

Using an institutional review board-approved database, we reviewed 119 consecutive patients who had undergone robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty at our institution during an 8-year period (May 2002 to February 2010). Data were collected in a combined retrospective and prospective manner. The patients were stratified into primary repair and secondary repair for the primary analysis. The patients were also stratified into those with stones and those without stones for the secondary analysis. We compared the demographic, operative, postoperative, and radiographic outcomes. Student's t test and Pearson's chi-square correlation were used for statistical analysis of continuous and categorical variables, respectively.

RESULTS

Of the original 119 patients, data were available for 117. Of the 117 patients, 97 had undergone primary pyeloplasty repair and 20 had undergone secondary pyleloplasty repair. Radiographic data were available for 84 patients with primary repair and 17 patients with secondary repair. The radiographic success rate was 96.1% and 94.1%, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found in the patient demographics, operative data, or postoperative or radiographic outcomes for the primary analysis. Additionally, no differences were found in the outcomes for patients with concomitant stone disease.

CONCLUSION

These data represent the largest single-center report of its kind. These data strongly suggest that robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty is a safe and durable option for secondary UPJO repair.

Efficacy of endopyelotomy in patients with secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Few studies have focused on secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) as a disease entity. This study was designed to elucidate the etiology of secondary UPJO and to assess the success rate of endopyelotomy in these cases.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients who underwent an endopyelotomy by a single surgeon from May 1997 to September 2009 was conducted. Secondary UPJO was defined anastomotic strictures after dismembered pyeloplasty or as de novo formation after renal surgery. Success of the procedure was defined as both radiographic and symptomatic resolution of obstruction.

RESULTS

Of 157 endopyelotomies performed, 41 patients were considered to have secondary UPJO. Of these 41, previous open or laparoscopic pyeloplasties had failed in 14. Twenty classified as iatrogenic from previous renal surgeries: 10 open, 8 percutaneous, and 2 ureteroscopic. Two cases of secondary UPJO were attributed to strictures that were secondary to impacted stones in the past. The remaining five patients were considered to have idiopathic secondary UPJO and had previous normal imaging studies demonstrating absence of hydronephrosis before development of UJPO. The surgical success rate was 83.5% (35/41) for endopyelotomy in these cases. Seventy-five percent (3/4) of endopyelotomies in children ≤5 years old failed.

CONCLUSIONS

With proper selection, endopyelotomy for secondary UPJO in the adult population was found to be successful and should be considered before more invasive therapy. Success in the pediatric population was poor in this limited evaluation.