Email this article Laparoscopic buccal plasty of the pyeloureteral segment and proximal ureter
- Authors: Guliev B.G.1,2, Komyakov B.K.1, Avazkhanov Z.P.1,2, Korol E.I.2
-
Affiliations:
- North-Western State Medical University named after I.I. Mechnikov
- City Mariinsky Hospital
- Issue: Vol 13, No 1 (2023)
- Pages: 43-51
- Section: Original articles
- URL: https://journals.rcsi.science/uroved/article/view/134243
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.17816/uroved321558
- ID: 134243
Cite item
Open Access
Access granted
Subscription Access
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With recurrent extended strictures of the pyeloureteral segment and the proximal ureter, when standard operations are ineffective or technically impossible, the narrowed area can be replaced with a flap from the cheek mucosa.
AIM: The aim of the study is the results of laparoscopic plastic surgery of the pyeloureteral segment and proximal ureter with buccal graft.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Minimally invasive plastic surgery of the extended stricture of the pyeloureteral segment, upper and middle third of the ureter with a flap from the cheek mucosa was performed in 27 patients. There were 16 men, 11 women, and the average age was 51 years. The cause of narrowing in 16 patients was previously performed pyeloplasty, in 10 — contact ureterolithotripsy in the proximal ureter, in 1 — his injury during laparoscopic excision of a parapelvical kidney cyst. Laparoscopic access was used in 24 patients, and robot-assisted access was used in 3 patients. In 17 of them, the narrowed area was replaced by the onlay technique, in 10 patients, anastomosis augmentation was performed with a buccal graft.
RESULTS: There were no intraoperative complications. The duration of operations ranged from 115 to 340 minutes. There were no cases of urine leaking through the drainage. Fever up to 38.0 °C was observed in 5 (18.5%) patients, 3 (11.1%) of them underwent antibacterial therapy (grade II according to Clavien), and 2 (7.4%) without nephrostomy drainage, puncture nephrostomy (grade IIIa according to Clavien) was performed. There were no complications according to Clavien ≥ IIIb degree. On excretory urograms and computed tomography, the area of the ureter replaced by a buccal flap is wide and well passable. In patients with pyeloureteral segment strictures, a decrease in the size of expanded cups and pelvis was observed in dynamics. Clinically, all operations were successful, as it was possible to relieve patients from nephrostomy drainage and symptoms of upper urinary tract obstruction.
CONCLUSIONS: Buccal ureteroplasty may be the method of choice in patients with extensive narrowing of the pyeloureteral segment and proximal ureter. It is a relatively simple operation and does not require extensive mobilization of the ureter and provides good functional results.
Full Text
##article.viewOnOriginalSite##About the authors
Bahman G. Guliev
North-Western State Medical University named after I.I. Mechnikov; City Mariinsky Hospital
Author for correspondence.
Email: gulievbg@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2359-6973
SPIN-code: 8267-5027
Dr. Sci. (Med.), professor of the Department of Urology
Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg; Saint PetersburgBoris K. Komyakov
North-Western State Medical University named after I.I. Mechnikov
Email: komyakovbk@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8606-9791
SPIN-code: 7864-9123
Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, head of the Department of Urology
Russian Federation, Saint PetersburgZhaloliddin P. Avazkhanov
North-Western State Medical University named after I.I. Mechnikov; City Mariinsky Hospital
Email: professor-can@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1551-0284
postgraduate student, urologist
Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg; Saint PetersburgEvgeniy I. Korol
City Mariinsky Hospital
Email: evgeniy.korol.82@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-9282-807X
urologist
Russian Federation, Saint PetersburgReferences
- Martov AG, Kornienko SI. Small invasive way of treatment of the upper urinary tracts. Kuban scientific medical bulletin. 2010;(8): 126–133. (In Russ.)
- Lucas JW, Ghiraldi E, Ellis J, Friedlander JI. Endoscopic management of ureteral strictures: an update. Curr Urol Rep. 2018;19(4): 24–31. doi: 10.1007/s11934-018-0773-4
- Komyakov BK, Guliev BG. Khirurgiya protyazhennykh suzhenii mochetochnikov. Saint Petersburg: Nevskii dialekt, 2005. 257 p. (In Russ.)
- Bansal A, Sinha RJ, Jhanwar A, et al. Laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation with Boari flap for the management of long-segment ureteral defect: A case series with review of the literature. Turk J Urol. 2017;43(3):313–318. doi: 10.5152/tud.2017.44520
- White C, Stifelman M. Ureteral reimplantation, psoas hitch, and Boari flap. J Endourol. 2020;34(S1): S25–S30. doi: 10.1089/end.2018.0750
- Komyakov BK. Kishechnaya i appendikulyarnaya plastika mochetochnikov. Moscow: GEOTAR-Media, 2015. 416 p. (In Russ.)
- Launer BM, Redger KD, Koslov DS, et al. Long-term follow up of ileal ureteral replacement for complex ureteral strictures: single institution study. Urology. 2021;157:257–262. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2021.07.012
- Srivastava D, Sureka SK, Yadav P, et al. Ureterocalicostomy for reconstruction of complicated ureteropelvic junction bstruction in adults: Long-term outcome and factors predicting failure in a contemporary cohort. J Urol. 2017;198(6):1374–1378. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.06.079
- Guliev BG. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty in recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Urologiia. 2019;(4):16–19. (In Russ.) doi: 10.18565/urology.2019.4.16-19
- Lee Z, Waldorf BT, Cho EY, et al. Robotic ureteroplasty with buccal mucosa graft for the management of complex ureteral strictures. J Urol. 2017;198(6):1430–1435. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.06.097
- Guliev BG, Komyakov BK, Avazkhanov JP. Laparoscopic substitution of the proximal ureter using buccal mucosa. Urologiia. 2021;(3):13–19. (In Russ.) doi: 10.18565/urology.2021.3.13-19
- Cheng S, Fan S, Wang J, et al. 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. 2021;53(3):479–488. doi: 10.1007/s11255-020-02679-5
- Lee Z, Lee M, Koster H, et al. Collaborative of reconstructive robotic ureteral surgery (CORRUS). A multi-institutional experience with robotic ureteroplasty with buccal mucosa graft: an updated analysis of intermediate-term outcomes. Urology. 2021;147:306–310. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2020.08.003
- Fan S, Yin L, Yang K, et al. Posteriorly augmented anastomotic ureteroplasty with lingual mucosal onlay grafts for long proximal ureteral strictures: 10 cases of experience. J Endourol. 2021;35(2):192–199. doi: 10.1089/end.2020.0686
- Yang K, Fan S, Wang J, et al. Robotic-assisted lingual mucosal graft ureteroplasty for the repair of complex ureteral strictures: technique description and the medium-term outcome. Eur Urol. 2022;81(5):533–540. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.01.007
- Liang C, Wang J, Hai B, et al. Lingual mucosal graft ureteroplasty for long proximal ureteral stricture: 6 years of experience with 41 cases. Eur Urol. 2022;82(2):193–200. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.05.006
- Somerville JJF, Naude JH. Segmental ureteric replacement: an animal study using a free non-pedicled graft. Urol Res. 1984;12(2):115–119. doi: 10.1007/bf00257176
- Naude JH. Buccal mucosal grafts in the treatment of ureteric lesions. BJU Int. 1999;83(7):751–754. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.00019.x
- Kroepfl D, Loewen H, Klevecka V, Musch M. Treatment of long ureteric strictures with buccal mucosal grafts. BJU Int. 2010;105(10):1452–1455. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08994.x
- Badawy AA, Abolyosr A, Saleem MD, Abuzeid AM. Buccal mucosa graft for ureteral stricture substitution: initial experience. Urology. 2010;76(4):971–975. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2010.03.095
- Trapeznikova MF, Bazaev VV, Shibaev AN, et al. Replacement plastic reconstruction of extended ureteral stricture using buccal mucosa autograft. Urologiia. 2014;(2):16–19. (In Russ.)
- Volkov AA, Zuban ON, Budnik NV, Saenko GI. Surgical treatment of extended strictures and ureteral obliterations using oral mucosa graft. Our own experience. Experimental and clinical urology. 2020;(3): 124–131. (In Russ.) doi: 10.29188/2222-8543-2020-12-3-124-131
- Zhao LC, Yamaguchi Y, Bryk DJ, et al. Robot-assisted ureteral reconstruction using buccal mucosa. Urology. 2015;86(3):634–638. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2015.06.006
- Yang CH, Lin YS, Weng WC, et al. Validation of robotic-assisted ureteroplasty with buccal mucosa graft for stricture at the proximal and middle ureters: the first comparative study. J Robot Surg. 2022;16(5):1009–1017. doi: 10.1007/s11701-021-01331-3
Supplementary files
