Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Laparoscopic ureterocalicostomy for complicated upper urinary tract obstruction: mid-term follow-up

  • Urology - Original Paper
  • Published:
International Urology and Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To report on the largest series of laparoscopic ureterocalicostomies done for complicated upper urinary obstruction.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the data from 6 transperitoneal laparoscopic ureterocalicostomies performed in our institution from January 2008 to January 2012. Symptomatic complicated upper urinary obstruction was the main reason for all the procedures. The recorded data included age, gender, clinical presentation, duration of symptoms, laterality, mean operative time, hospital stay, complications and clinical and functional outcomes.

Results

The median patient age was 20.1 (2–44) years, and all patients were females. Patients underwent laparoscopic ureterocalicostomy due to previous failed procedures (3 patients), anatomic abnormalities (2 patients) and a severe upper ureteral stenosis (1 patient). The median operative time was 215 (180–270) min. There were no major complications. There were no conversions to open surgery. In a median follow-up of 30 (8–56) months, all patients presented with clinical and radiological improvement with no signs of obstruction. In all cases, the postoperative renal scintigraphy revealed a T1/2 lower than 10 min.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic ureterocalicostomy is feasible and associated with high success rate in well-selected cases with complicated upper urinary obstructions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rohrmann D, Snyder HM 3rd, Duckett JW Jr, Canning DA, Zderic SA (1997) The operative management of recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J Urol 158:1257–1259

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Selli C, Rizzo M, Moroni F, Dedola G, Amorosi A (1992) Ureterocalicostomy in the treatment of pyeloplasty failures. Urol Int 48:274–277

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gill IS, Cherullo EE, Steinberg A, Desai MM, Abreu SC, Ng C, Kaouk JH (2004) Laparoscopic ureterocalicostomy: initial experience. J Urol 171:1227–1230

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Matlaga BR, Shah OD, Singh D, Streem SB, Assimos DG (2005) Ureterocalicostomy: a contemporary experience. Urology 65:42–44

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Arap MA, Torricelli FC, Mitre AI, Chambo JL, Duarte RJ, Srougi M (2013) Lessons from 90 consecutive laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasties in a residency program. Scand J Urol Nephrol 47:323–327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Osman T, Eltahawy I, Fawaz K, Shoeib M, Elshawaf H, El Halaby R (2011) Ureterocalicostomy for treatment of complex cases of ureteropelvic junction obstruction in adults. Urology 78:202–207

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Mesrobian HG, Kelalis PP (1989) Ureterocalicostomy: indications and results in 21 patients. J Urol 142:1285–1287

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Park J, Kim WS, Hong B, Park T, Park HK (2008) Long-term outcome of secondary endopyelotomy after failed primary intervention for ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Int J Urol 15:490–494

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Patel T, Kellner CP, Katsumi H, Gupta M (2011) Efficacy of endopyelotomy in patients with secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J Endourol 25:587–591

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sundaram CP, Grubb RL 3rd, Rehman J, Yan Y, Chen C, Landman J, McDougall EM, Clayman RV (2003) Laparoscopic pyeloplasty for secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J Urol 169:2037–2040

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Neuwirt K (1948) Implantation of the ureter into the lower calyx of the renal pelvis. Urol Cutaneous Rev 52:351

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Duckett JW, Pfister RR (1982) Ureterocalicostomy for renal salvage. J Urol 128:98–101

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kay R (1988) Ureterocalicostomy. Urol Clin N Am 15:129–133

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Hawthorne NJ, Zincke H, Kelalis PP (1976) Ureterocalicostomy: an alternative to nephrectomy. J Urol 115:583–586

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cherullo EE, Gill IS, Ponsky LE, Banks KL, Desai MM, Kaouk JH, Meraney AM, Skacel M, Sung GT (2003) Laparoscopic ureterocalicostomy: a feasibility study. J Urol 169:2360–2364

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Agarwal MM, Sharma D, Singh SK, Kumar S, Bhattacharya A, Acharya N, Mandal AK (2007) Laparoscopic ureterocalicostomy for salvage of giant hydronephrotic kidney: initial experience. Urology 70:590

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kumar S, Panigrahy B (2009) Laparoscopic management of complex ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 19:521–528

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Korets R, Hyams ES, Shah OD, Stifelman MD (2007) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic ureterocalicostomy. Urology 70:366–369

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Schimpf MO, Wagner JR (2009) Case report: robotic-assisted laparoscopic ureterocalicostomy with long-term follow-up. J Endourol 23:293–295

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bruhn AM, Hyams ES, Stifelman MD (2010) Laparoscopic and robotic assisted adrenal surgery. Minerva Urol Nefrol 62:305–318

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sandhu GS, Nepple KG, Tanagho YS, Andriole GL (2013) Laparoscopic prostatectomy for prostate cancer: continued role in urology. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 22:125–141

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Brito AH, Mitre AI, Arap S (2002) Endopyelotomy with the Acucise catheter. Int Braz J Urol 28:302–309 (discussion 309–310)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

No conflict of interests.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Urology, University of Sao Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil

    Marco Antonio Arap, Hiury Andrade, Fabio Cesar Miranda Torricelli, Francisco Tibor Denes, Anuar Ibrahim Mitre, Ricardo Jordão Duarte & Miguel Srougi

  2. Rua Adma Jafet, 50, 3rd Floor, São Paulo, SP, CEP 01308-050, Brazil

    Marco Antonio Arap

Authors
  1. Marco Antonio Arap
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hiury Andrade
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fabio Cesar Miranda Torricelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Francisco Tibor Denes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Anuar Ibrahim Mitre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ricardo Jordão Duarte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Miguel Srougi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marco Antonio Arap.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Arap, M.A., Andrade, H., Torricelli, F.C.M. et al. Laparoscopic ureterocalicostomy for complicated upper urinary tract obstruction: mid-term follow-up. Int Urol Nephrol 46, 865–869 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-013-0591-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-013-0591-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation