D Gambachidze1, V Phé1, S J Drouin1, B Wolff1, J Parra1, P Mozer1, R Renard-Penna1, E Chartier-Kastler1, M Rouprêt2. 1. Service d'urologie de l'hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, faculté de médecine Pierre-et-Marie-Curie, université Paris 6, AP-HP, 47-83, boulevard de l'Hôpital, 75013 Paris, France. 2. Service d'urologie de l'hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, faculté de médecine Pierre-et-Marie-Curie, université Paris 6, AP-HP, 47-83, boulevard de l'Hôpital, 75013 Paris, France. Electronic address: morgan.roupret@psl.aphp.fr.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Vesico-ureteral reimplantations (VUR) for adults are complex procedures, often practicing for distal ureteral lesions. Our goal was to synthesis the main indications for VUR, different techniques and their functional outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A literature review in English by Medline, Embase and Google scholar was performed using the following keywords: ureter; laparoscopy; robotics, reimplantation; surgery; obstruction; morbidity; complications; psoas hitch; Boari flap; ureteroneocystostomy. RESULTS: In more than half of the cases, aetiology was a iatrogenic ureteral lesion. When the ureteral defect was less than 2 cm, direct or non-refluxing VUR was the technique of choice. If defect was superior than 2 cm the Boari flap or vesicopsoas hitch were preferred. Several surgical approaches were feasible: open, laparoscopic only, robot assisted laparoscopic. Estimated blood loss, pain and mean hospital stay seemed better with conventional or robotic coelioscopy. Nevertheless, complications, pre-/post-operative renal function and mean operative time seemed similar. The most frequent major complication was the anastomotic urine leakage. CONCLUSIONS: The VUR techniques are well codified now even if it's a rare procedure. Functional outcomes are satisfied according to literature and morbidity is more and more decreasing but the level of evidence of the studies is low.
OBJECTIVES: Vesico-ureteral reimplantations (VUR) for adults are complex procedures, often practicing for distal ureteral lesions. Our goal was to synthesis the main indications for VUR, different techniques and their functional outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A literature review in English by Medline, Embase and Google scholar was performed using the following keywords: ureter; laparoscopy; robotics, reimplantation; surgery; obstruction; morbidity; complications; psoas hitch; Boari flap; ureteroneocystostomy. RESULTS: In more than half of the cases, aetiology was a iatrogenic ureteral lesion. When the ureteral defect was less than 2 cm, direct or non-refluxing VUR was the technique of choice. If defect was superior than 2 cm the Boari flap or vesicopsoas hitch were preferred. Several surgical approaches were feasible: open, laparoscopic only, robot assisted laparoscopic. Estimated blood loss, pain and mean hospital stay seemed better with conventional or robotic coelioscopy. Nevertheless, complications, pre-/post-operative renal function and mean operative time seemed similar. The most frequent major complication was the anastomotic urine leakage. CONCLUSIONS: The VUR techniques are well codified now even if it's a rare procedure. Functional outcomes are satisfied according to literature and morbidity is more and more decreasing but the level of evidence of the studies is low.