Objective: Analyze technical details and results of laparoscopic treatment of ureterolithiasis.
Materials And Methods: Between January 2005 and August 2008 it was performed laparoscopic ureterolithotomy in 22 patients in our service. Two (9%) by retroperitoneal access and 20 (91%) by transperitoneal access. Mean size of the calculi was 15 mm. with a variation from 8 mm to 23 mm. The calculus were in the upper tract in 18 patients (81.8%) and in mid ureter in 4 patients (18.2), any of the calculus were in lower ureter. Most of calculi were obstructive stones for more than 2 months. Eight patients were submited a previous section of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy and 2 by extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy plus ureterolithotripsy as a calculi treatment attempt. Twelve patients had a laparoscopic ureterolithotomy as a primary indication for treatment.
Results: Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy was successful for 20 patients (90.9%), and the fails occurred in the beginning of our experiment. Mean operative time was 145 minutes with range from 70 to 240 minutes. The indwelling ureteral stent was used in 03 cases; 02 preoperative, and 01 postoperative. The ureteral suture was performed with absorbable 4.0 separated stitches in all patients. The global average of permanence in hospital was 3.3 days and the drain permanence was 7.2 days. The global complication rate was 13,6%. The global rate of stone free was 91%, and there were residual stone in 2 patients.
Conclusions: The laparoscopic treatment of ureterolithiasis besides minimally invasive, it is viable, secure and very effective. It should have taken into consideration as a procedure to extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy. But, in cases where there are obstructive stones for a long time, in selected patients and, in special, in patients with just one kidney, it can be considered as a first line treatment. About the access, if retroperitoneal or transperitoneal; it is not still possible to affirm which would be the best one, the option must take into account the surgeon preference and experience.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0210-4806(09)74205-6 | DOI Listing |
BJU Int
November 2024
Department of Urology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Int Urol Nephrol
January 2025
Department of Urology, Yongchuan Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, No. 439, Xuanhua Road, Yongchuan District, Chongqing, 402160, People's Republic of China.
Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of three minimally invasive surgical approaches for treating large upper ureteral stones complicated by infection in elderly (> 60 years) patients.
Methods: Clinical data from 95 elderly patients with large upper ureteral stones and infection, treated at our hospital between January 2018 and April 2023, were retrospectively analyzed. The surgical approaches included FURL (flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy) 33 cases, mPCNL (minimally percutaneous nephrolithotomy) 29 cases, and RLUL (retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy) 33 cases.
BJU Int
November 2024
Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Sao Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Objective: To compare the outcomes of retrograde flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) with retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (RLU) for large proximal ureteric stones.
Patients And Methods: A prospective randomised trial was conducted from January 2018 through December 2022 including patients with impacted proximal ureteric stones of 15-25 mm. Patients underwent fURS or RLU.
Urolithiasis
July 2024
Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, 277 West Yanta Road, Xi'an, Shaanxi, 710061, People's Republic of China.
Impacted proximal ureteral stones (IPUS) present challenging clinical scenarios due to their persistent nature and associated complications. While ureterorenoscopy (URS) lithotripsy is recommended as the primary treatment, controversies exist regarding the optimal management of such stones. In this retrospective analysis, we compared the operative outcomes and long-term results of transperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (LU) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for IPUS larger than 15 mm.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFUrolithiasis
July 2024
Urology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt.
The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of transperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (TPLU), retrograde flexible ureteroscopy (R-fURS), and mini-percutaneous antegrade flexible ureteroscopy (A-fURS) for treating large (≥ 15 mm) impacted proximal ureteral stones. A total of 105 adult patients were randomized into 3 equal groups: group A (35) patients underwent TPLU, group B (35) patients underwent R-fURS, and group C (35) patients underwent A-fURS. The initial stone-free rate was 100%, 68.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!