Ziho Lee1, Matthew E Sterling2, Aryeh Y Keehn2, Matthew Lee2, Michael J Metro2, Daniel D Eun2. 1. Department of Urology, Temple University School of Medicine, Parkinson Pavilion (Zone C), 3rd Floor, 3401 N. Broad Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19140, USA. ziho.lee@gmail.com. 2. Department of Urology, Temple University School of Medicine, Parkinson Pavilion (Zone C), 3rd Floor, 3401 N. Broad Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19140, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We describe our technique for using intraureteral and intraurinary diversion indocyanine green (ICG) during robotic ureteroenteric reimplantation and report our outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed eight patients who underwent ten robotic ureteroenteric reimplantations between August 2013 and July 2017. ICG was injected antegrade and/or retrograde into the lumen of the ureter, and retrograde into the lumen of the urinary diversion. All patients consented to off-label use of ICG. Postoperatively, all patients were assessed for: clinical success: the absence of flank pain; and radiological success: the absence of obstruction on renal scan and/or loopogram. RESULTS: Visualization of ICG under near-infrared fluorescence allowed for precise identification of the strictured ureter and urinary diversion, which fluoresced green; and localization the ureteroenteric stricture margins, which poorly fluoresced green. The median operative time was 208 min (IQR 191-299), estimated blood loss was 125 ml (IQR 69-150), and length of stay was 6 days (IQR 1-8). Three of eight (37.5%) patients suffered a minor (Clavien ≤ 2), and 2/8 (25.0%) patients suffered a major (Clavien > 2) post-operative complication. There were no complications related to ICG use. At a median follow-up of 29 months (IQR 21-38), 8/10 (80.0%) ureteroenteric reimplantations were clinically and radiologically successful. CONCLUSIONS: Intraureteral and intraurinary diversion ICG may be utilized as a real-time contrast agent during robotic ureteroenteric reimplantation to assist with identification of the strictured ureter and urinary diversion, and delineation of the ureteroenteric stricture margins. Despite this, RUER remains a technically difficult and morbid procedure.
PURPOSE: We describe our technique for using intraureteral and intraurinary diversion indocyanine green (ICG) during robotic ureteroenteric reimplantation and report our outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed eight patients who underwent ten robotic ureteroenteric reimplantations between August 2013 and July 2017. ICG was injected antegrade and/or retrograde into the lumen of the ureter, and retrograde into the lumen of the urinary diversion. All patients consented to off-label use of ICG. Postoperatively, all patients were assessed for: clinical success: the absence of flank pain; and radiological success: the absence of obstruction on renal scan and/or loopogram. RESULTS: Visualization of ICG under near-infrared fluorescence allowed for precise identification of the strictured ureter and urinary diversion, which fluoresced green; and localization the ureteroenteric stricture margins, which poorly fluoresced green. The median operative time was 208 min (IQR 191-299), estimated blood loss was 125 ml (IQR 69-150), and length of stay was 6 days (IQR 1-8). Three of eight (37.5%) patients suffered a minor (Clavien ≤ 2), and 2/8 (25.0%) patients suffered a major (Clavien > 2) post-operative complication. There were no complications related to ICG use. At a median follow-up of 29 months (IQR 21-38), 8/10 (80.0%) ureteroenteric reimplantations were clinically and radiologically successful. CONCLUSIONS: Intraureteral and intraurinary diversion ICG may be utilized as a real-time contrast agent during robotic ureteroenteric reimplantation to assist with identification of the strictured ureter and urinary diversion, and delineation of the ureteroenteric stricture margins. Despite this, RUER remains a technically difficult and morbid procedure.
Authors: Ahmed A Hussein; Zishan Hashmi; Seyedeh Dibaj; Tareq Altartir; Thomas Fiorica; Joseph Wing; Mohammad Durrani; John Binkowski; Lesley Boateng; Gregory Wilding; Khurshid A Guru Journal: J Urol Date: 2015-11-06 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Greg E Gin; Nora H Ruel; Jaspreet S Parihar; Jonathan N Warner; Bertram E Yuh; Jonathan Yamzon; Timothy G Wilson; Clayton S Lau; Kevin G Chan Journal: Int J Urol Date: 2017-03-12 Impact factor: 3.369
Authors: Milton V Marshall; John C Rasmussen; I-Chih Tan; Melissa B Aldrich; Kristen E Adams; Xuejuan Wang; Caroline E Fife; Erik A Maus; Latisha A Smith; Eva M Sevick-Muraca Journal: Open Surg Oncol J Date: 2010
Authors: Giovanni E Cacciamani; A Shakir; A Tafuri; K Gill; J Han; N Ahmadi; P A Hueber; M Gallucci; G Simone; R Campi; G Vignolini; W C Huang; J Taylor; E Becher; F W B Van Leeuwen; H G Van Der Poel; L P Velet; A K Hemal; A Breda; R Autorino; R Sotelo; M Aron; M M Desai; A L De Castro Abreu Journal: World J Urol Date: 2019-07-08 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Albert Carrion; Ahmed Aly Hussein; Daniel Eun; Abolfazl Hosseini; Josep Maria Gaya; Ronney Abaza; Xavier Bonet; Umar Iqbal; Randall A Lee; Ziho Lee; Matthew Lee; Carles Raventos; Oriol Moreno; Joan Palou; Alberto Breda; Fernando Lozano; Francesc Vigués; Enrique Trilla; Khurshid A Guru Journal: Eur Urol Open Sci Date: 2022-01-03