Cargando…
Intracorporeal ileal ureter replacement using laparoscopy and robotics
INTRODUCTION: Ileal ureter is a suitable treatment option for patients with long ureteric strictures. Minimally invasive techniques have been shown to be as safe as open techniques but superior in terms of post–operative recovery. We report our experience using minimally invasive techniques for tota...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Polish Urological Association
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4310887/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25667767 http://dx.doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2014.04.art21 |
_version_ | 1782354921666904064 |
---|---|
author | Sim, Allen Todenhöfer, Tilman Mischinger, Johannes Halalsheh, Omar Boettge, Johannes Rausch, Steffen Bier, Simone Aufderklamm, Stefan Stenzl, Arnulf Gakis, Georgios Schwentner, Christian |
author_facet | Sim, Allen Todenhöfer, Tilman Mischinger, Johannes Halalsheh, Omar Boettge, Johannes Rausch, Steffen Bier, Simone Aufderklamm, Stefan Stenzl, Arnulf Gakis, Georgios Schwentner, Christian |
author_sort | Sim, Allen |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Ileal ureter is a suitable treatment option for patients with long ureteric strictures. Minimally invasive techniques have been shown to be as safe as open techniques but superior in terms of post–operative recovery. We report our experience using minimally invasive techniques for total intracorporeal ureteral replacement. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A chart review revealed five patients who underwent intracorporeal ileal ureter using minimally invasive techniques in the preceding 5 years. 4 patients underwent conventional laparoscopic surgery and 1 patient underwent robotic–assisted surgery. Patient's characteristics, perioperative data and functional outcomes as well as a detailed description of surgical technique are reported. In all 5 of these patients, the ileal ureter was performed completely intracorporeally. RESULTS: The median age of our patients is 61 (range 42–73). The median operative time was 250 minutes (range 150–320) and median blood loss was 100 ml (range 50–200). The median hospital stay was 8 days (range 6–10) and there were no major perioperative complications reported. At median follow up of 22 months (range 4–38), there were no recurrences of strictures or any other complications. CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated the safety and feasibility of minimally invasive intracorporeal ileal ureter. Numbers are still small but its application is likely to grow further. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4310887 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Polish Urological Association |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-43108872015-02-09 Intracorporeal ileal ureter replacement using laparoscopy and robotics Sim, Allen Todenhöfer, Tilman Mischinger, Johannes Halalsheh, Omar Boettge, Johannes Rausch, Steffen Bier, Simone Aufderklamm, Stefan Stenzl, Arnulf Gakis, Georgios Schwentner, Christian Cent European J Urol Original Paper INTRODUCTION: Ileal ureter is a suitable treatment option for patients with long ureteric strictures. Minimally invasive techniques have been shown to be as safe as open techniques but superior in terms of post–operative recovery. We report our experience using minimally invasive techniques for total intracorporeal ureteral replacement. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A chart review revealed five patients who underwent intracorporeal ileal ureter using minimally invasive techniques in the preceding 5 years. 4 patients underwent conventional laparoscopic surgery and 1 patient underwent robotic–assisted surgery. Patient's characteristics, perioperative data and functional outcomes as well as a detailed description of surgical technique are reported. In all 5 of these patients, the ileal ureter was performed completely intracorporeally. RESULTS: The median age of our patients is 61 (range 42–73). The median operative time was 250 minutes (range 150–320) and median blood loss was 100 ml (range 50–200). The median hospital stay was 8 days (range 6–10) and there were no major perioperative complications reported. At median follow up of 22 months (range 4–38), there were no recurrences of strictures or any other complications. CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated the safety and feasibility of minimally invasive intracorporeal ileal ureter. Numbers are still small but its application is likely to grow further. Polish Urological Association 2014-12-05 2014 /pmc/articles/PMC4310887/ /pubmed/25667767 http://dx.doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2014.04.art21 Text en Copyright by Polish Urological Association http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License, permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Paper Sim, Allen Todenhöfer, Tilman Mischinger, Johannes Halalsheh, Omar Boettge, Johannes Rausch, Steffen Bier, Simone Aufderklamm, Stefan Stenzl, Arnulf Gakis, Georgios Schwentner, Christian Intracorporeal ileal ureter replacement using laparoscopy and robotics |
title | Intracorporeal ileal ureter replacement using laparoscopy and robotics |
title_full | Intracorporeal ileal ureter replacement using laparoscopy and robotics |
title_fullStr | Intracorporeal ileal ureter replacement using laparoscopy and robotics |
title_full_unstemmed | Intracorporeal ileal ureter replacement using laparoscopy and robotics |
title_short | Intracorporeal ileal ureter replacement using laparoscopy and robotics |
title_sort | intracorporeal ileal ureter replacement using laparoscopy and robotics |
topic | Original Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4310887/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25667767 http://dx.doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2014.04.art21 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT simallen intracorporealilealureterreplacementusinglaparoscopyandrobotics AT todenhofertilman intracorporealilealureterreplacementusinglaparoscopyandrobotics AT mischingerjohannes intracorporealilealureterreplacementusinglaparoscopyandrobotics AT halalshehomar intracorporealilealureterreplacementusinglaparoscopyandrobotics AT boettgejohannes intracorporealilealureterreplacementusinglaparoscopyandrobotics AT rauschsteffen intracorporealilealureterreplacementusinglaparoscopyandrobotics AT biersimone intracorporealilealureterreplacementusinglaparoscopyandrobotics AT aufderklammstefan intracorporealilealureterreplacementusinglaparoscopyandrobotics AT stenzlarnulf intracorporealilealureterreplacementusinglaparoscopyandrobotics AT gakisgeorgios intracorporealilealureterreplacementusinglaparoscopyandrobotics AT schwentnerchristian intracorporealilealureterreplacementusinglaparoscopyandrobotics |