Urology · 2017
Intentional Omission of Ureteral Stents During Robotic-assisted Intracorporeal Ureteroenteric Anastomosis: Is It Safe and Feasible?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tan Wei Phin, Whelan Patrick, Deane Leslie A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To describe the surgical technique we used to perform a stentless intracorporeal ureteroenteric anastomosis and to determine the outcomes in this initial series.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of a prospective database of all patients undergoing robotic-assisted intracorporeal urinary diversion with stentless ureteroenteric anastomosis between March 2014 and July 2016. Diversions were performed at the time of either robotic-assisted laparoscopic cystectomy for bladder cancer or urinary diversion for other indications.
RESULTS: A total of 10 patients underwent implantation of 20 ureters into the intestine via a robotic-assisted approach with intentional omission of stents. Median body mass index was 29.57 (first quartile 23.68, third quartile 34.69). Median American Society of Anesthesiologists score was 3 (range 2-3). Seven patients had intracorporeal ileal conduit reconstruction and 3 patients had an intracorporeal neobladder creation. There were no patients who developed a stricture of the ureter nor did any patient develop a leak at the ureteroenteric anastomosis. All patients had normal serum creatinine at least 4 weeks after surgery, and all patients had follow-up computed tomography of the kidneys, which were normal. The median follow-up was 8 months (first quartile = 3 months, third quartile = 17 months).
CONCLUSION: Robotic intracorporeal urinary diversion with intentional omission of ureteral stents is a safe and feasible option when establishing continuity of the genitourinary and gastrointestinal tracts.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of a prospective database of all patients undergoing robotic-assisted intracorporeal urinary diversion with stentless ureteroenteric anastomosis between March 2014 and July 2016. Diversions were performed at the time of either robotic-assisted laparoscopic cystectomy for bladder cancer or urinary diversion for other indications.
RESULTS: A total of 10 patients underwent implantation of 20 ureters into the intestine via a robotic-assisted approach with intentional omission of stents. Median body mass index was 29.57 (first quartile 23.68, third quartile 34.69). Median American Society of Anesthesiologists score was 3 (range 2-3). Seven patients had intracorporeal ileal conduit reconstruction and 3 patients had an intracorporeal neobladder creation. There were no patients who developed a stricture of the ureter nor did any patient develop a leak at the ureteroenteric anastomosis. All patients had normal serum creatinine at least 4 weeks after surgery, and all patients had follow-up computed tomography of the kidneys, which were normal. The median follow-up was 8 months (first quartile = 3 months, third quartile = 17 months).
CONCLUSION: Robotic intracorporeal urinary diversion with intentional omission of ureteral stents is a safe and feasible option when establishing continuity of the genitourinary and gastrointestinal tracts.