Technical options in complex ureteral lesions: 'ureter-sparing' surgery.
case_series · Level IV
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 8056021.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
From January 1979 to December 1992, 74 patients with ureteral lesions due to ureteral or renal instrumentations, failed gynecological or reconstructive surgery were addressed to our department for a reconstructive program. Fifty-two of them were managed by standard ureteropyeloanastomosis or psoas bladder hitch and ureteral reimplants. Twenty-two patients (12 females, 10 males, age range 28-68 years) suffered from extensive ureteral lesions (5-7 cm) and were managed by major ureteral reconstructive surgery intended to restore urothelial continuity. Three patients had a solitary kidney, and 6 cases suffered from bilateral ureteral injuries. The procedures employed were: psoas kidney hitch with ureteropelvic anastomosis (4 cases), kidney psoas bladder hitch (5 cases), 'extended' psoas bladder hitch (5 cases), transureterouretero-anastomosis+psoas bladder hitch (5 cases), psoas kidney-bladder hitch and transureterouretero-anastomosis (1 case), renal autotransplantation (2 cases). Only 5 minor postoperative complications were observed and all patients but one had satisfactory results with a follow-up ranging from 6 to 84 months. The authors believe that the restoration of urothelial continuity is the best option compared to other technical solutions such as ileal replacement, or diversion and nephrectomy. Autotransplantation should be reserved for rare selected cases.
Medical subject headings
- Ureteral Diseases