Tomás Ros M, Guzmán Martínez PL, Rico Galiano JL, Gutiérrez AS, Ferrero Doria R, Morga Egea JP, Navas Pastor J, García Ligero J. [Management of the complications of ureterointestinal reimplantation in urinary diversion].
ARCH ESP UROL 1998;
51:965-70. [PMID:
9951116]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/10/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
To analyze our experience in the management of complications of ureteroenteric reimplantation in patients undergoing urinary diversion by endourological techniques or open surgery, in order to identify a useful algorithm that takes the oncologic prognosis into account, as well as the probability of success.
METHODS
A retrospective study was conducted on 136 patients who had undergone urinary diversion from 1987-1998. Of these, 126 had transitional cell carcinoma, two had infiltrating carcinoma, two had a benign condition and 6 had undergone urinary diversion for patient comfort without cystectomy. The following techniques were utilized: cutaneous ureteroileostomy or Bricker technique (104 patients), Mainz neobladder (10 patients), ileal neobladder (15 patients), colonic conduit (5 patients) and cutaneous ureter (2 patients).
RESULTS
Overall, 56 patients (41%) had some type of alteration at the ureteroenteric reimplantation site, but only 36 (26%) required intervention. The reimplantation techniques utilized were: the Bricker direct ureteroileostomy (26 patients), Le Duc (6 patients), Leadbetter (3 patients), and the direct cutaneous technique (1 patient). Patient mean age was 67 years (range 53-80). There were 35 males and one female. Seven patients required immediate reimplantation due to a persistent urinary fistula and 29 had late obstruction (more than 3 months), accounting for 21.3% of the cases undergoing urinary diversion. The antegrade endourological approach was utilized in 24 patients (5 nephrostomy alone and 19 stent or balloon dilatation). Dilatation was performed palliatively in 6 cases with extensive tumor spread. Permanent success was achieved in 5 cases (38%) and in spite of the initial success, there were 4 reobstructions. Open surgery was performed in 24 patients (66% of the complicated reimplantations); 5 of these patients had another pathology that warranted laparotomy, 7 required reimplantation early due to a fistula and two patients with a nonfunctioning kidney underwent nephrectomy. Ureteral replacement using the ileum was performed in 4 patients and direct reimplantation to the primary loop was performed in 6 patients. Good surgical results were consistently achieved.
CONCLUSIONS
The complication rate of ureteral reimplantation is high in patients undergoing urinary diversion. Endourology has an important role in these cases, particularly in patients with a poor prognosis. Surgery achieves the best results. Although they may entail difficulty, complex cases such as extensive ureteral necrosis can be managed successfully.
Collapse