INTRODUCTION: Ureteral diverticulum is a rare urological condition with only 45 cases described in the literature. These previously reported cases vary in their presentation, diagnosis and management and there is no consensus in the literature on the best diagnostic tool available. We describe our experience on diagnosing and managing this condition in two patients and provide a descriptive review of the current literature on ureteral diverticulum. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Medline search was performed to identify all reported cases of ureteral diverticulum. Key words used were: ureteral diverticulum; abortive bifid ureter; congenital diverticulum; acquired diverticulum. We also reviewed the records of two patients who presented consecutively to our institution with a ureteral diverticulum. The clinical and radiological characteristics of this entity were then evaluated. RESULTS: Forty-one manuscripts were identified, encompassing single case reports and case series, the largest of which contained seven patients. Two additional cases were diagnosed in our institution; a true congenital diverticulum and an abortive bifid ureter which is synonymous with a true ureteral diverticulum. Both were uncomplicated cases and were managed conservatively. Retrograde pyelography was used for definitive diagnosis of this lesion. CONCLUSION: Ureteral diverticulum may present as an incidental finding or with a secondary complication. Conservative management is advocated in the literature for non-complicated cases. Retrograde pyelography is our diagnostic tool of choice.
INTRODUCTION: Ureteral diverticulum is a rare urological condition with only 45 cases described in the literature. These previously reported cases vary in their presentation, diagnosis and management and there is no consensus in the literature on the best diagnostic tool available. We describe our experience on diagnosing and managing this condition in two patients and provide a descriptive review of the current literature on ureteral diverticulum. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Medline search was performed to identify all reported cases of ureteral diverticulum. Key words used were: ureteral diverticulum; abortive bifid ureter; congenital diverticulum; acquired diverticulum. We also reviewed the records of two patients who presented consecutively to our institution with a ureteral diverticulum. The clinical and radiological characteristics of this entity were then evaluated. RESULTS: Forty-one manuscripts were identified, encompassing single case reports and case series, the largest of which contained seven patients. Two additional cases were diagnosed in our institution; a true congenital diverticulum and an abortive bifid ureter which is synonymous with a true ureteral diverticulum. Both were uncomplicated cases and were managed conservatively. Retrograde pyelography was used for definitive diagnosis of this lesion. CONCLUSION: Ureteral diverticulum may present as an incidental finding or with a secondary complication. Conservative management is advocated in the literature for non-complicated cases. Retrograde pyelography is our diagnostic tool of choice.