THE RESULTS OF INTESTINOPLASTY OF URETERS
- Authors: Komyakov B.K1, Ochelenko V.A1
-
Affiliations:
- Issue: No 3 (2013)
- Pages: 5-9
- Section: Articles
- URL: https://journals.eco-vector.com/1728-2985/article/view/279820
- ID: 279820
Cite item
Open Access
Access granted
Abstract
The article presents the immediate and long-term results of intestinoplasty of extensive uretral obstructions. From 2001 to 2012, 47 patients underwent intestinoplasty, and 3 patients - sigmoureteroplasty. 33 patients (66%) had unilateral lesions, and 17 (34%) - bilateral lesions. Postoperative complications occurred in 14% of cases. Early complications occurred in 6 (12%), late complications - in 1 (2%) patient. Complications requiring surgery occurred in 3 (6%) patients. The results of re-operations were successful. Deaths were not recorded. The observation period ranged from 3 months to 11 years. All patients achieved the restoration of urodynamics and normalization of kidney function. Intestinoplasty in extensive uretral obstruction is the operation of choice, as it allows to restore the flow of urine from the kidney, improves its function, arrests the chronic pyelonephritis and rescues patients from permanent renal and ureteral fistulas.
Keywords
Full Text
References
- Лоран О.Б., Синякова Л.А., Серегин А.В. и др. Использование изолированных сегментов кишечника в оперативном лечении лучевых повреждений мочевыводящих путей. Урология. 2012;2:20-24.
- Комяков Б.К., Очеленко В.А. Обструкция мочеточников в ангиохирургии. СПб., Наука. 2011. 175 с.
- Комяков Б.К., Гулиев Б.Г., Новиков А.И. и др. Интестинальная пластика мочеточников. Урология. 2005;2:24-28.
- Komyakov B.K., Ochelenko V.A. Treatment of ureteral lesions with vermiform appendix: a report of 14 cases; Eur. Urol. 2011; 10(2 Suppl.):77-78.
- DUrso G., De Fabii A. Ricerche sperimental sulla uretero-enteroplastika. Il. Policlinico. 1900;VII(14):348.
- Заевлошин М.М., Гиньковский В.М. Про пластику сечевого мiхура; сечеводiв. Тр. Одеськ. Ин-та удосконалення лiкарiв iм. М. Горького. Киïв, 1938;1:54-64.
- Фрумкин А.П. Наш опыт интестинальной пластики в урологии. Урология. 1960;3:10.
- Клепиков Ф.А. Пластика мочеточника тонкой кишкой (клин.-экспериментальное исследование): Автореф. дисс. докт. мед. наук. Харьков. 1966.
- Кан Д.В. Кишечная пластика мочеточника. М.: Медицина, 1968.
- Карпенко В.С. Кишечная пластика мочеточника в лечении приобретенных обструктивных уретерогидронефрозов. Урология. 2001;2:3-6.
- Gill I.S., Savage S.J., Senagore A.J. et al. Laparoscopic ileal ureter. J Urol. 2000; 163(4):1199-1202.
- Joseph R. Wagner, Megan O. Schimpf, and Jeffrey L. Cohen, Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Ileal Ureter. J Soc of Laparoendoscopic Surg. 2008; 12(3):306-309.
- Verduyckt F., Heesakkers J., Debruyne F. Long-term results of ileal substitution. Eur. Urol. 2002;40:102.
- Armatys S.A., Mellon M.J., Stephen D.W. et al. Use of Ileum as Ureteral Replacement in Urological Reconstruction. J Urol. 2009; 181(1):177-181.
- Chung B.I., Hamawy K.J., Zinman L.N. et al. The use of bowel for ureteral replacement for complex ureteral reconstruction: longterm result. J. Urol. 2006;175(Suppl. 1):179-183.
- Boxer R.J., Fritzsche P., Skinner D.G. et al. Replacement of the ureter by small intestine: clinical application and results of the ileal ureter in 89 patients. J.Urol. 1979;121:728.
Supplementary files
