A Systematic Review of Ureteral Reimplantation Techniques in Endometriosis: Laparoscopic Versus Robotic-Assisted Approach.

Introduction

Endometriosis, characterized by the presence of endometrial tissue outside the uterus, includes deep endometriosis (DE), which can affect the urinary tract. Ureteral endometriosis (UE) is a rare but significant manifestation that can lead to ureteral obstruction, hydronephrosis, and potential kidney loss. This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness and outcomes of laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted ureteral reimplantation techniques in patients with UE. Materials and

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted following PRISMA guidelines across PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, from inception to July 2024. Studies included patients with UE who underwent ureteral reimplantation using laparoscopic or robotic-assisted techniques. Data on patient demographics, surgical technique, duration of surgery, complications, follow-up duration, and clinical outcomes were extracted and analyzed.

Results

Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 225 patients in the laparoscopic group and 24 in the robotic-assisted group. Lich-Gregoir ureteral reimplantation, with or without a psoas hitch, was the predominant technique used. The average surgery duration was 271.1 min for the laparoscopic group and 310.4 min for the robotic-assisted group. Recurrence rates for UE were 2.95% for laparoscopic and 5.9% for robotic-assisted procedures. The robotic-assisted group had a significantly shorter hospital stay (6.7 days vs. 9.1 days, p < 0.01). Postoperative complication rates were comparable between the two techniques (p = 0.422).

Conclusions

Both laparoscopic and robotic-assisted techniques for ureteral reimplantation in UE are safe and effective, with the choice of technique guided by surgeon expertise and specific clinical scenarios. However, the limited number of robotic cases introduces a bias, despite statistical significance.