Ureteroplasty with buccal flap: indications, technique, alternative methods

Мұқаба

Дәйексөз келтіру

Толық мәтін

Ашық рұқсат Ашық рұқсат
Рұқсат жабық Рұқсат берілді
Рұқсат жабық Рұқсат ақылы немесе тек жазылушылар үшін

Аннотация

This literature review is devoted to the analysis of indications for ureteroplasty with a buccal flap, its technique, and the alternative surgical options. Reconstructive surgery of the ureter has more than a century of history, during which various surgical interventions have been proposed and improved depending on the location and length of the stricture. Over the past decades, a method of replacing the ureter with a flap from the buccal or tongue mucosa was introduced. The use of such flaps for the ureteral reconstruction is not a new concept; the possibility of performing such a procedure was confirmed at the end of the last century. Successful results of experimental and clinical studies have allowed the gradual adoption of this technique to replace long defects in the upper and middle third of the ureter. In buccal ureteroplasty, robot-assisted approach is widely used, contributing to a high success rate and fewer postoperative complications. The accumulation of experience in such reconstructive procedures and the analysis of the results allow to clarify the indications and contraindications, improve the technique, and carry out multicenter studies.

According to the literature, ureteroplasty using a buccal or tongue mucosa flap is most suitable for long narrowing of the ureteropelvic junction, the upper and middle third of the ureter, which are amenable to endoscopic procedures or segmental resection with end-to-end anastomosis.

Толық мәтін

Рұқсат жабық

Авторлар туралы

B. Guliev

City Mariinsky hospital

Хат алмасуға жауапты Автор.
Email: gulievbg@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2359-6973

Ph.D., MD, professor, Head of Center of Urology with robot-assisted surgery

Ресей, Saint Petersburg

J. Avazkhanov

City Mariinsky hospital

Email: professor-can@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1551-0284

urologist at the Center of Urology with robot-assisted surgery

Ресей, Saint Petersburg

Әдебиет тізімі

  1. Korneyev I., Ilyin D., Schultheiss D., Chapple C. The first oral mucosal graft urethroplasty was carried out in the 19th century: the pioneering experience of Kirill Sapezhko (1857–1928). Eur Urol. 2012;62 (4):624–627. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.06.035.
  2. Humby G., Higgins T. A one-stage operation for hypospadias. Br J Surg. 1941;29:84–92. doi: 10.1002/bjs.18002911312.
  3. Bhargava S., Chapple C.R. Buccal mucosal urethroplasty: is it the new gold standard? BJU Int. 2004;93:1191–1193. doi: 10.1111/j.1464- 410X.2003.04860.x.
  4. Lumen N., Vierstraete-Verlinde S., Oosterlinck W., et al. Buccal versus lingual mucosa graft in anterior urethroplasty: a prospective comparison of surgical outcome and donor site morbidity. J Urol. 2016;195(1):112–117. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.07.098.
  5. Gn M., Sterling J., Sinkin J., et al. The expanding use of buccal mucosal grafts in urologic surgery. Urology. 2021;156:e58–e65. doi: 10.1016/j.uology.2021.05.039.
  6. Wessells H., Angermeier K.W, Elliott S., et al. Male urethral stricture: American urological association guideline. J Urol. 2017;197(1):182–190. Doi: 10.1016/ j.juro.2016.07.087.
  7. Markiewicz M.R., De Santis J.L., Margarone J.E., et al. Morbidity associated with oral mucosa harvest for urological reconstruction: an overview. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008;66:739–744. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2007.11.023.
  8. Somerville J.J., Naude J.H. Segmental ureteric replacement: an animal study using a free non-pedicled graft. Urol Res. 1984;12(2):115–119. doi: 10.1007/bf00257176.
  9. Naude J.H. Buccal mucosal grafts in the treatment of ureteric lesions. BJU Int. 1999;83:751–754. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.00019.x.
  10. Kroepfl D., Loewen H., Klevecka V., Musch M. Treatment of long ureteric strictures with buccal mucosal grafts. BJU Int. 2010;105(10):1452–1455. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08994.x.
  11. Badawy A.A., Abolyosr A., Saleem M.D., Abuzeid A.M. Buccal mucosa graft for ureteral stricture substitution: initial experience. Urology. 2010;76(4):971–975. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2010.03.095.
  12. Trapeznikova M.F., Bazaev V.V., Shibaev A.N., et al. Replacement plastic surgery of extended ureteral strictures with an autograft of buccal mucosa. Urologiia. 2014;2:16–19.
  13. Fahmy O., Schubert T., Khairul-Asri M.G., et al. Total proximal ureter substitution using buccal mucosa. Int. J Urol. 2017;24(4):320–23. doi: 10.1111/iju.13307.
  14. Volkov A.A., Zuban O.N., Budnik N.V., Saenko G.I. Surgical treatment of extended strictures and obliterations of the ureter using graft of the oral mucosa – own experience. Experimental and clinical urology. 2020;3:124–131. doi: 10.29188/2222-8543-2020-12-3-124-131.
  15. Zhao L.C., Yamaguchi Y., Bryk D.J., et al. Robot-assisted ureteral reconstruction using buccal mucosa. Urology. 2015;86(3):634–638. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2015.06.006.
  16. Li B., Xu Y., Hai B., et al. Laparoscopic onlay lingual mucosal graft ureteroplasty for proximal ureteral stricture: initial experience and 9-month follow-up. Int. Urol. Nephrol. 2016;48(8):1275–1279. doi: 10.1007/s11255-016-1289-9.
  17. Arora S., Campbell L., Tourojman M., et al. Robotic buccal mucosal graft ureteroplasty for complex ureteral stricture. Urology. 2017;110:257–258. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2017.06.037.
  18. Lee Z., Waldorf B.T., Cho E.Y., et al. Robotic ureteroplasty with buccal mucosa graft for the management of complex ureteral strictures. J. Urol. 2017;198(6):1430–1435. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.06.097.
  19. Гулиев Б.Г., Комяков Б.К., Авазханов Ж.П. Лапароскопическая буккальная пластика проксимального отдела мочеточника. Урология. 2021;3:13–19. doi: 10.18565/urology.2021.3.13-19.
  20. Volkov A.A., Budnik N.V., Zuban O.N. Laparoscopic onlay-ureteroplasty with buccal graft with prolonged recurrent stricture of the upper third of the ureter. Urology. 2021;5:69–72. doi: 10.18565/urology.2021.5.69-72.
  21. Cheng S., Fan S., Wang L., et al. Laparoscopic and robotic ureteroplasty using onlay flap or graft for the management of long proximal or middle ureteral strictures: our experience and strategy. Int Urol. Nephrol. 2021;53(3):479–488. doi: 10.1007/s11255-020-02679-5.
  22. Lee Z., Lee M., Koster H., Cheng N. Collaborative of reconstructive robotic ureteral surgery. A multi-institutional experience with robotic ureteroplasty with buccal mucosa graft: an updated analysis of intermediate-term outcomes. Urology. 2021;147:306–310. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2020.08.003.
  23. Guliyev B.G., Ilyin D.M., Avazkhanov Zh.P. Robot-assisted buccal plasty of extended recurrent stricture of the pyelureteral segment of the left kidney. Urology Herald. 2021;9(4):122–126. doi: 10.21886/2308-6424-2021-9-4-122-126.
  24. Lee Z., Lee M., Koster H., et al. A multi-institutional experience with robotic ureteroplasty with buccal mucosa graft: an updated analysis of intermediate-term outcomes. Urology. 2021;147:306–310. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2020.08.003.
  25. Moncrief T., Gor R., Goldfarb R.A., et al. Urethral rest with suprapubic cystostomy for obliterative or nearly obliterative urethral strictures: urethrographic changes and implications for management. J Urol. 2018;199:(5):1289–1295. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.11.110.
  26. Lee Z., Lee M., Lee R., et al. Ureteral rest is associated with improved outcomes in patients undergoing robotic ureteral reconstruction of proximal and middle ureteral strictures. Urology. 2021;152:160–166. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2021.01.058.
  27. Gupta D.K., Chandrasekharam V.V., Srinivas M., Bajpai M. Percutaneous nephrostomy in children with ureteropelvic junction obstruction and poor renal function. Urology. 2001;57(3):547–550. doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(00)01046-3.
  28. Zhang S., Zhang Q., Ji C., et al. Improved split renal function after percutaneous nephrostomy in young adults with severe hydronephrosis due to ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J Urol. 2015;193(1):191–195. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2014.07.005.
  29. Heijkoop B., Kahokehr A.A. Buccal mucosal ureteroplasty for the management of ureteric strictures: a systematic review of the literature. Int J Urol. 2021;28:189–195. doi: 10.1111/iju.14426.
  30. Zhao L.C., Weinberg A.C., Lee Z., et al. Robotic ureteral reconstruction using buccal mucosa grafts: a multi-institutional experience. Eur Urol. 2018;73(3):419–426. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.11.015.
  31. Duty B.D., Kreshover J.E., Richstone L., Kavoussi L.R. Review of appendiceal onlay flap in the management of complex ureteric strictures in six patients. BJU Int. 2015;115(2):282–287. doi: 10.1111/bju.12651.
  32. Komyakov B., Ochelenko V., Guliev B., Shevnin M. Ureteral substitution with appendix. Int. J Urol. 2020;27(8):663–669. doi: 10.1111/iju.14268.
  33. Jun M.S., Stair S., Xu A., et al. A multi-institutional experience with robotic appendiceal ureteroplasty. Urology. 2020;145:287–291. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2020.06.062.
  34. Wang J., Li Z., Fan S., et al. Robotic ureteroplasty with appendiceal onlay flap: an update on the outcomes of 18-month follow-up. Transl. Androl. Urol. 2022;11(1):2 –9. doi: 10.21037/tau-21-840.
  35. Komyakov B.K., Al-Attar T.H., Guliyev B.G. Intestinal and appendicular plastic surgery of the ureter. Urology. 2021;2:14–20. doi: 10.18565/urology.2021.2.14-20.
  36. Martov A.G., Ergakov D.V., Andronov A.S., Dutov S.V. Minimally invasive treatment of upper urinary tract strictures. Surgery. 2014;12:46–55.
  37. Lucas J.W., Ghiraldi E., Ellis J., Friedlander J.I. Endoscopic management of ureteral strictures: an update. Curr Urol Rep. 2018;19:24. doi: 10.1007/s11934-018-0773-4.
  38. Masieri L., Sforza S., Di Maida F., et al. Robotic correction of iatrogenic ureteral stricture: preliminary experience from a tertiary referral centre. Scand J Urol. 2019;53(5):356–360. doi: 10.1080/21681805.2019.1651390.
  39. Elbers J.R., Rodríguez Socarrás M., Rivas J.G., et al. Robotic repair of ureteral strictures: techniques and review. Curr Urol Rep. 2021;22(8):39. doi: 10.1007/s11934-021-01056-8.
  40. Mauck R.J., Hudak S.J., Terlecki R.P., Morey A.F. Central role of Boari bladder flap and downward nephropexy in upper ureteral reconstruction. J Urol. 2011;186(4):1345–1349. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.05.086.
  41. Hofer M.D., Aguilar-Cruz H.J., Singla N., et al. Expanding applications of renal mobilization and downward nephropexy in ureteral reconstruction. Urology. 2016;94:232–236. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2016.04.008.
  42. Kozinn S.I., Canes D., Sorcini A., Moinzadeh A. Robotic versus open distal ureteral reconstruction and reimplantation for benign stricture disease. J Endourol. 2012;26(2):147–151. doi: 10.1089/end.2011.0234.
  43. Lee Z., Llukani E., Reilly C.E., et al. Single surgeon experience with robot-assisted ureteroureterostomy for pathologies at the proximal, middle, and distal ureter in adults. J Endourol. 2013;27:994–999. doi: 10.1089/end.2013.0075.
  44. Bao J.S., He Q., Li Y., et al. Yang-Monti principle in bridging long ureteral defects: cases report and a systematic review. Urol. J. 2017;14(4):4055– 4061. PMID: 28670676.
  45. Liu D., Zhou H., Hao X., et al. Laparoscopic Yang-Monti ureteral reconstruction in children. Urology. 2018;118:177–182. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2018.04.034.
  46. Komyakov B.K. Intestinal and appendicular plastic surgery of ureters. M.: GEOTAR-Media, 2015. 416 p.
  47. Dein B., Hefnawy A.S., D’Elia G., et al. Long-term outcome of Yang-Monti ileal replacement of the ureter: a technique suitable for mild, moderate loss of kidney function and solitary kidney. Urology. 2021;152:153–159. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2020.09.061.
  48. Patil N.N., Mottrie A., Sundaram B. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation with psoas hitch: a multi-institutional, multinational evaluation. Urology. 2008;72:47–50. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.12.097.
  49. Elsamra S.E., Theckumparampil N., Garden B., et al. Open, laparoscopic, and robotic ureteroneocystotomy for benign and malignant ureteral lesions: a comparison of over 100 minimally invasive cases. J Endourol. 2014;28:1455–1459. doi: 10.1089/end.2014.0243.
  50. White C., Stifelman M. Ureteral reimplantation, psoas hitch and Boari flap. J Endourol. 2020;34(S1):S25–S30. doi: 10.1098/end.2018.0750.
  51. Kogan M.I., Pavlov V.N., Belousov I.I. et al. Comparative analysis of the effectiveness and safety of open and laparoscopic techniques of distal ureter plastic surgery by Boari. Urologia. 2020;6:75–80. doi: 10.18565/urology.2020.6.75-80.
  52. Zhang G., Zhao J., Zhao G., et al. Laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation with a Boari flap for long-segment ureteric avulsion or ureteric strictures: our experience. Int Urol. Nephrol. 2022;8:1865–1870. doi: 10.1007/s11255-022-03224-2.
  53. Wolff B., Chartier-Kastler E., Mozer P., et al. Long-term functional outcomes after ileal ureter substitution: a single-center experience. Urology. 2011;78:692–95. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2011.04.054.
  54. Roth J.D., Monn M.F., Szymanski K.M., et al. Ureteral reconstruction with ileum: long-term follow-up of renal function. Urology. 2017;104:225–229. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2017.02.026.
  55. Xiong S., Zhu W., Li X., et al. Intestinal interposition for complex ureteral reconstruction: a comprehensive review. Int J Urol. 2020;27:377–386. doi: 10.1111/iju.14222.
  56. Launer B.M., Redger K.D., Koslov D.S. et al. Long-term follow up of ileal ureteral replacement for complex ureteral strictures: single institution study. Urology. 2021;157:257–262. doi: 10.1016/j.urology. 2021.07.012.
  57. Komyakov B.K., Guliyev B.G. Surgery of extended ureteral constrictions. St. Petersburg, Nevsky dialect. 2005;256 p.
  58. Pham N.H., Visser W.R., Phan-Huu Q.V., Hampton L.J. Renal autotransplantation for the treatment of complete ureteral loss: a case report. Res Rep Urol. 2021;28:733–737. doi: 10.2147/RRU.S328832.
  59. Kurmanov T., Zhanbyrbekuly U., Zheksen E. Autotransplantation of the kidney as a method of treatment of ureteral defects. Urologia. 2022;4:82–85. doi: 10.18565/urology.2022.4.82-85.
  60. Lee Z., Keehn A.Y., Sterling M.E., et al. A review of buccal mucosa graft ureteroplasty. Curr Urol Rep. 2018;19(4):23. doi: 10.1007/s11934-018-0772-5.
  61. Bjurlin M.A., Gan M., McClintock T.R. et al. Near-infrared fluorescence imaging: emerging applications in robotic upper urinary tract surgery. Eur Urol. 2014;65(4):793–801. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.09.023.
  62. Lee Z., Moore B., Giusto L., Eun D.D. Use of indocyanine green during robot-assisted ureteral reconstructions. Eur Urol. 2015;67(2):291–298. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.08.057.
  63. Martini A., Villari D., Nicita G. Long-term complications arising from bowel interposition in the urinary tract. Int J Surg. 2017;44:278–280. Doi: 10.1016/ j.ijsu.2017.07.030.
  64. Pamecha Y., Shelke U., Patil B., et al. Use of ileum for complex ureteric reconstruction: assessment of long-term outcome, complications, and impact on renal function. Urol Ann. 2018;10:369–374. doi: 10.4103/UA.UA_5_18.

Қосымша файлдар

Қосымша файлдар
Әрекет
1. JATS XML

© Bionika Media, 2023

Осы сайт cookie-файлдарды пайдаланады

Біздің сайтты пайдалануды жалғастыра отырып, сіз сайттың дұрыс жұмыс істеуін қамтамасыз ететін cookie файлдарын өңдеуге келісім бересіз.< / br>< / br>cookie файлдары туралы< / a>