Andrew Franklin1, Naveen Pokala2, Charles Jones1, Carrie Johans1, Kurt Strom3, James Cummings1. 1. Division of Urology, University of Missouri, One Hospital Dr, MC 301, McHaney Hall, Columbia, MO, 65212, USA. 2. Division of Urology, University of Missouri, One Hospital Dr, MC 301, McHaney Hall, Columbia, MO, 65212, USA. pokalan@health.missouri.edu. 3. North Colorado Urology, Banner Health, Greeley, CO, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To analyze the robotic approach as treatment of iatrogenic ureteral injuries. METHODS: Medical records were reviewed for patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation at the University of Missouri from 2009 to 2014. Patient charts were analyzed for demographics, prior abdominal surgeries, circumstances of injury, outcomes, and other relevant information. RESULTS: Nine patients met inclusion criteria. The average age was 44.6. Patients had an average of 4.3 abdominal surgeries. Injury occurred during hysterectomy (open, laparoscopic, or vaginal) in eight patients (88.9 %), five cases were laparoscopic, two utilized robotic assistance, and one injury occurred during uterosacral vault suspension. All cases were related to gynecological procedures. On average, ureteral injury was detected 17.2 days after the initial surgery and repaired 62.3 days after initial operation. The average surgical repair time was 295.9 min (range 168-498) with an average blood loss of 77.2 mL (range 20-150). Four patients required a psoas hitch, with one receiving both a psoas hitch and a Boari flap. Postoperatively, patients had an average hospital stay of 2.7 days. One patient had ileus for greater than 3 days, and another was readmitted within 30 days for pain control and antiemetics following stent removal. One patient underwent open reimplantation 3 years after original surgery for development of ureteral stricture. At follow-up, all patients had returned to baseline renal function. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic approach is feasible and a safe option for distal iatrogenic ureteral injuries occurring during gynecological procedures. Prior abdominal surgery or delayed repair does not preclude a robotic approach.
OBJECTIVES: To analyze the robotic approach as treatment of iatrogenic ureteral injuries. METHODS: Medical records were reviewed for patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation at the University of Missouri from 2009 to 2014. Patient charts were analyzed for demographics, prior abdominal surgeries, circumstances of injury, outcomes, and other relevant information. RESULTS: Nine patients met inclusion criteria. The average age was 44.6. Patients had an average of 4.3 abdominal surgeries. Injury occurred during hysterectomy (open, laparoscopic, or vaginal) in eight patients (88.9 %), five cases were laparoscopic, two utilized robotic assistance, and one injury occurred during uterosacral vault suspension. All cases were related to gynecological procedures. On average, ureteral injury was detected 17.2 days after the initial surgery and repaired 62.3 days after initial operation. The average surgical repair time was 295.9 min (range 168-498) with an average blood loss of 77.2 mL (range 20-150). Four patients required a psoas hitch, with one receiving both a psoas hitch and a Boari flap. Postoperatively, patients had an average hospital stay of 2.7 days. One patient had ileus for greater than 3 days, and another was readmitted within 30 days for pain control and antiemetics following stent removal. One patient underwent open reimplantation 3 years after original surgery for development of ureteral stricture. At follow-up, all patients had returned to baseline renal function. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic approach is feasible and a safe option for distal iatrogenic ureteral injuries occurring during gynecological procedures. Prior abdominal surgery or delayed repair does not preclude a robotic approach.
Authors: Geert De Naeyer; Peter Van Migem; Peter Schatteman; Paul Carpentier; Etienne Fonteyne; Alexandre Marie Mottrie Journal: J Endourol Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Paul T Gellhaus; Akshay Bhandari; M Francesca Monn; Thomas A Gardner; Prashanth Kanagarajah; Christopher E Reilly; Elton Llukani; Ziho Lee; Daniel D Eun; Hani Rashid; Jean V Joseph; Ahmed E Ghazi; Guan Wu; Ronald S Boris Journal: BJU Int Date: 2014-10-23 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Okechukwu A Ibeanu; Ralph R Chesson; Karolynn T Echols; Mily Nieves; Fatuma Busangu; Thomas E Nolan Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 7.661