eISSN: 2299-0054
ISSN: 1895-4588
Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques
Current issue Archive Videoforum Manuscripts accepted About the journal Supplements Abstracting and indexing Subscription Contact Instructions for authors
SCImago Journal & Country Rank


1/2019
vol. 14
 
Share:
Share:
more
 
 
abstract:
Original paper

Antegrade stent placement in laparoscopic upper urinary tract surgery. Is there an easy way?

Kaan Gökçen, Gökhan Gökçen, Yakup Kordan, Emre Kıraç, Gökçe Dündar, Emin Yener Gültekin

Videosurgery Miniinv 2019; 14 (1): 102–106
Online publish date: 2018/07/23
View full text
Get citation
ENW
EndNote
BIB
JabRef, Mendeley
RIS
Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero
AMA
APA
Chicago
Harvard
MLA
Vancouver
 
Introduction
Antegrade placement of double J stents in laparoscopy is considered a challenging and time-consuming process due to limitations regarding stent flexibility.

Aim
To describe the method we used to facilitate the antegrade placement of intracorporeal stents in laparoscopic upper urinary tract (LUUT) surgery and report its results.

Material and methods
Data obtained from 42 consecutive patients who had stents placed antegradely in laparoscopic pyeloplasty or in laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for middle-upper ureteral stones were retrospectively evaluated. The mean age of the patients was 30.1 ±18.6 (10 months–68 years) and 13 patients were in the paediatric age group. All patients in the paediatric age group underwent laparoscopic pyeloplasty.

Results
The mean operative time for the 42 total cases, of which 32 underwent laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty and 10 laparoscopic ureterolithotomy, was 126.9 ±33.5 (70–200) min and the intraoperative stent placement time was calculated as 2.61 ±0.8 (1.5–5) min. The patients, who had a mean hospitalization time of 2.8 ±0.9 (2–5) months, required no additional interventions and no complications were encountered intraoperatively. In the patient series that had a mean follow-up time of 17.4 ±11.3 (1–35), it was determined only in 1 patient that the distal tip of the stent had not been in the bladder.

Conclusions
The described modified antegrade stent placement technique is a practical method that is safe for all LUUT cases in both paediatric and adult age groups and it has been shown to produce successful outcomes and to be time-saving.

keywords:

laparoscopy, stenting, pyeloplasty, pelviureteral anastomoses, upper ureteral stones

references:
Kwon YU, Lee SI, Jeong TY. Treatment of upper and mid ureter stones: comparison of semirigid ureteroscopic lithotripsy with holmium: YAG laser and shock wave lithotripsy. Korean J Urol 2007; 48: 171-5.
Kijvikai K, Patcharatrakul S. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: Its role and some controversial technical considerations. Int J Urol 2006; 13: 206-10.
Lee YS, Lee DH, Han WK, et al. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy has a  role for treating ureteral stones. Korean J Urol 2006; 47: 498-501.
Türk C, Petřík A, Sarica K, et al. EAU guidelines on interventional treatment for urolithiasis. Eur Urol 2016; 69: 475-82.
Piaggio LA, Franc-Guimond J, Noh PH, et al. Transperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty for primary repair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction in infants and children: comparison with open surgery. J Urol 2007; 178: 1579-83.
Tasian GE, Casale P. The robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty: gateway to advanced reconstruction. Urol Clin North Am 2015; 42: 89-97.
Huang Y, Wu Y, Shan W, et al. An updated meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children. Int J Clin Exp Med 2015; 8: 4922-31.
Shkodkin SV, Kogan MI, Lyubushkin AV, et al. Complications of stenting of upper urinary tract. Urologiia 2015; 1: 94-8.
Ko YH, Kang SG, Park JY, et al. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy as a  primary modality for large proximal ureteral calculi: comparison to rigid ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A  2011; 21: 7-13.
Şahin S, Aras B, Ekşi M, et al. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy. JSLS 2016; 20: 1-7.
Arumainayagam N, Minervini A, Davenport K, et al. Antegrade versus retrograde stenting in laparoscopic pyeloplasty. J Endourol 2008; 22: 671-4.
Chandrasekharam VV. Is retrograde stenting more reliable than antegrade stenting for pyeloplasty in infants and children? Urology 2005; 66: 1301-4.
Mandhani A, Goel S, Bhandari M. Is antegrade stenting superior to retrograde stenting in laparoscopic pyeloplasty? J Urol 2004; 171: 1440-2.
Eassa W, Al Zahrani A, Jednak R, et al. A  novel technique of stenting for laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children. J Pediatr Urol 2012; 8: 77-82.
Kim HS, Lee BK, Jung JW, et al. J-tube technique for double-j stent insertion during laparoscopic upper urinary tract surgical procedures J Endourol 2014; 28: 1278-81.
Yu J, Wu Z, Xu Y, et al. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty with a  novel technique of JJ stenting in children. BJU Int 2011; 108: 756-9.
Derouiche A, El Atat R, Ben Slama MR, Chebil M. Endoscopic bridge operating-guide device applied for intracorporeal antegrade ureteric stenting during laparoscopic pyeloplasty. J Endourol 2009; 23: 1871-4.
Noh PH, Defoor WR, Reddy PP. Percutaneous antegrade ureteral stent placement during pediatric robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty. J Endourol 2011; 25: 1847-51.
Minervini A, Siena G, Masieri L, et al. Antegrade stenting in laparoscopic pyeloplasty: feasibility of the technique and time required for stent insertion. Surg Endosc 2009; 23: 1831-4.
Kalkan S, Ersöz C, Armagan A, et al. Modified antegrade stenting technique for laparoscopic pyeloplasty in infants and children. Urol Int 2016; 96: 183-7.
  
Quick links
© 2019 Termedia Sp. z o.o. All rights reserved.
Developed by Bentus.
PayU - płatności internetowe