LAPAROSCOPIC HEMINEPHRURETERECTOMY FOR DUPLEX KIDNEY IN CHILDREN


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

Introduction. Duplication of the upper urinary tract is one of the most common congenital urological anomalies. In patients with critically decreased or lost function of one of the renal segments, heminephrureterectomy is usually the treatment of choice. Until recently, this was an open surgery; in cases of complete removal of the ureter, an additional incision in the iliac region was required. Currently, heminephrureterectomy is increasingly performed laparoscopically. We report the experience in laparoscopic heminephrureterectomy (LHNUE) in 10 clinics in Russia and Belarus. Some of them have already used this technique for 10 years. Aim The study aimed to to improve the treatment results in children with urodynamic dysfunction due to duplicated upper urinary tract. Materials and methods. We retrospectively analyzed medical records of 111 children treated from 2007 to 2016. There were 26 (23.4%) boys and 85 (76.6%) girls with mean age 44.6 months (from 2 to 170) at the time of surgery. All children included in the study had complete duplex kidneys, including 51 (45.9%) right-sided and 60 (54.1%) left-sided. All the children underwent LHNUE for a critical decrease or absence of function of the upper or lower segment of the duplex kidney caused by the following pathology: obstruction of the ureterovesical junction with the development of the megaureter of the upper ureteral segment in 57 (51.4%) patients; ureterocele in 28 (25.2%); extra-vesical ectopic ureter with urinary incontinence in 10 (9.0%) girls; high-grade UVR in 16 (14.4%) patients. Results. There were no conversions in this series of patients. The mean operative time was 135 minutes (60-240 min.). All children included in the study were followed for 1 to 9 years after surgery. Complications occurred in 17 (15.3%) patients, of whom 12 (10.8%) required repeat surgery. In one patient with the loss of lower pole function, the treatment result was considered unsatisfactory. Conclusion. LHNUE for duplex kidney is performed by a few clinics and is still at the stage of development and accumulation of experience. Nevertheless, LHNUE, though an effective treatment modality, carries the risk of reducing or losing the function of the retained segment.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

I. M. Kagantsov

Republican Children’s Clinical Hospital; Pitirim Sorokin Syktyvkar State University

Email: ilkagan@rambler.ru
Dr.Med.Sci., Professor at the Department of Surgical Diseases; Head of Department of Urology Syktyvkar, Russia

V. V. Sizonov

RostSMU of Minzdrav of Russia

Email: vsizonov@mail.ru
Dr.Med.Sci., Professor Rostov-on-Don, Russia

V. I. Dubrov

The 2nd Children’s Hospital

Email: dubroff2000@mail.ru
Ph.D. Head of the Department of Urology Minsk, Republic of Belarus

S. G. Bondarenko

Clinical Emergency Hospital № 7

Email: sergebondarenko@rambler.ru
Ph.D. Head ofthe Department of Urology Volgograd, Russia

N. R. Akramov

Kazan State Medical University of Minzdrav of Russia

Email: aknail@rambler.ru
Dr.Med.Sci., Professor at the Department of Pediatric Surgery Kazan, Russia

O. S. Shmyrov

Morozovskaya Children’s City Clinical Hospital

Email: moroz-uro@mail.ru
Ph.D., Head of the Department of Urology Moscow, Russia

G. I. Kuzovleva

Children’s City Clinical Hospital № 9

Email: dr.gala@mail.ru
Ph.D. Moscow, Russia

N. V. Markov

Northern State Medical University of Minzdrav of Russia

Email: nikolarx@gmail.com
Ph.D., Associate Professor at the Department of Pediatric Surgery Arkhangelsk, Russia

D. E. Sablin

P.G. Vyzhletsov Regional Children’s Clinical Hospital

Email: Sablinde@yandex.ru
Pediatric Urologist-Andrologist Arkhangelsk, Russia

R. V. Surov

Regional Children’s Clinical Hospital

Email: rimvs@mail.ru
Pediatric Urologist-Andrologist Kemerovo, Russia

A. V. Pirogov

N.N. Silishcheva Regional Children’s Clinical Hospital

Email: alekspirogow@yandex.ru
Head of the Department of Urology Astrakhan, Russia

A. A. Logval’

Republican Children’s Clinical Hospital

Email: alex.logval@yandex.ru
Pediatric Urologist-Andrologist Syktyvkar, Russia

References

  1. Nation E.F. Duplication of the kidney and ureter: a statistical study of 230 new cases. J. Urol. 1944;51:456.
  2. Campbell M.F., Harrison J.H. Anomalies of the ureter. Urology. 3rded. WB Saunders Philadelphia. 1970. Р. 1487-1670.
  3. Keating M.A. Ureteral duplication anomalies: ectopic ureters and ureteroceles. In Docimo S.G., Canning D.A., Khoury A.E. (eds). Clinical pediatric urology, 5th ed., Informa UK, 2007, Ch. 40. Р. 593-648.
  4. Mackie G.G., Stephens F.D. Duplex kidneys: A correlation of renal dysplasia with position of the ureteral orifice. J Urol. 1975; 114:274-280.
  5. Rickwood A.M., Reiner I., Jones M., Pournaras C. Current management of duplex-system ureteroceles: Experience with 41 patients. Br J Urol. 1992;70:196-200.
  6. Belman A.B., Filmer R.B., King L.R. Surgical management of duplication of the collecting system. J Urol. 1974;112:316-321.
  7. Lee N.G., Corbett S.T., Cobb K., Bailey G.C., Burns A.S., Peters C.A. Bi-Institutional Comparison of Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Versus Open Ureteroureterostomy in the Pediatric Population. J. Endourol. 2015;29(11):1237-1241. doi: 10.1089/end.2015.0223.
  8. Wong Y.S., Tam Y.H., Pang K.K. A case report of laparoscopic ipsilateral ureteroureterostomy in children with renal duplex. Research and Reportsin Urology. 2016. Р. 35-39.
  9. Biles M.J., Finkelstein J.B., Silva M.V., Lambert S.M., Casale P. Innovation in Robotics and Pediatric Urology: Robotic Ureteroureterostomy for Duplex Systems with Ureteral Ectopia. J Endourol. 2016;30(10):1041-1048.
  10. Esposito et al. Retroperitoneal and laparoscopic heminephrectomy in duplex kidney in infants and children. Transl Pediatr 2016;5(4): 245-250.
  11. Jordan G.H., Winslow B.H. Laparoendoscopic upper pole partial nephrectomy with ureterectomy. J Urol 1993;150(3):940-943.
  12. Janetschek G., Seibold J., Radmayr C. et al. Laparoscopic heminephroureterectomy in pediatric patients. J Urol 1997;158:1928-1930.
  13. You D., Bang J.K., Shim M. et al. Analysis of the late outcome of laparoscopic heminephrectomy in children with duplex kidneys. BJU Int. 2010;106:250-254.
  14. El-Ghoneimi A. Paediatric laparoscopic surgery. Curr Opin Urol. 2003;13:329-335.
  15. El-Ghoneimi A., Farhat W., Bolduc S. et al. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic vs open partial nephroureterectomy in children. BJU Int. 2003;91:532-535.
  16. Piaggio L., Franc-Guimond J., Figueroa T.E. et al. Comparison of laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy for duplication anomalies in children. J Urol. 2006;175:2269-2273.
  17. Chandrasekharam V.V.S., Jayaram H. Laparoscopic ipsilateral ureteroureterostomy for the management of children with duplication anomalies. J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg. 2015;20(1):27-31. doi: 10.4103/0971-9261.145442.
  18. Marte A., Papparella A., Pintozzi L. Laparoscopic upper pole heminephroureterectomy in children: Seven-year experience. Afr J Paediatr Surg. 2015 ; 12(4) :227-231. doi: 10.4103/0189-6725.172546.
  19. Gundeti M.S., Ransley P.G., Duffy P.G., Cuckow P.M., Wilcox D.T. Renal outcome following heminephrectomy for duplex kidney. J Urol 2005;173(5):1743-1744.
  20. Poddubny I.V., Faizulin A.K., Fedorova E.V., Tolstov K.N., Petrova M.G., Malashenko A.S. Optimization of the technique of laparoscopic heminefarreterectomy in children. Children’s surgery. 2014;5:12-
  21. Malashenko A.S., Poddubny I.V., Faizulin A.K., Fedorova E.V., Tolstov K.N., Petrova M. G. Comparative analysis of the results of laparoscopic and open heminephrectomy in children. Surgery. 2014;10:68-72.
  22. Ade-Ajayi N., Wilcox D.T., Duffy P.G., Ransley P.G. Upper pole heminephrectomy: Is complete ureterectomy necessary? BJU Int. 2001;88:77-79.
  23. De Caluwe D., Chertin B., Puri P. Fate of the retained ureteral stump after upper pole heminephrectomy in duplex kidneys. J Urol. 2002;168:679-680.
  24. Agarwal D., Kandpal D.K., Chowdhary S.K. J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg. 2016;21(2):92-93. doi: 10.4103/0971-9261.158094.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies