https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2025.13869
Extra-anatomical urinary diversion for malignant ureteric obstruction: our clinical experience
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Published: 26 May 2025
Introduction and Objectives: Ureteral stenosis and upper urinary tract obstruction present significant clinical challenges, especially in cases involving complex, long strictures. Traditional management options like ureteral stents and percutaneous nephrostomy tubes often result in complications and diminished quality of life. Extra-anatomical urinary diversion (EAUD) offers an alternative approach, particularly for oncologic patients requiring palliative care.
Materials and Methods: From 2015 to 2019, eight patients with cancer-related ureteral strictures underwent EAUD. In all patients cancer-specific prognosis exceeded one year. The procedure was performed using a standard surgical technique.
Results: The mean patient age was 62.5 years, ranging from 22 to 82 years. The mean follow-up duration was 62.8 months. Improvement in renal function was observed in some patients, while the early complication rate was 62.5%. Notable complications included infections and encrustation of the prosthesis. Two patients experienced multiple infections of the overlying skin and soft tissue necessitated the dislodgement of the prothesis after 38 and 101 months, respectively.
Conclusions: Extra-anatomical stent placement constitutes a somewhat effective and safe option in the context of complex ureteral obstruction management in oncologic patients. The lack of external devices and its longer duration without the need for substitution compared with conventional double J stents can theoretically assure a better quality of life. However, a careful patient selection is needed in order to maximize the patients' benefit.
Downloads
EAU Guidelines. Edn. presented at the EAU Annual Congress Milan 2023.
Tlili G, Ammar H, Dziri S, et al. Antegrade double-J stent placement for the treatment of malignant obstructive uropathy: A retrospective cohort study. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2021;69:102726. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2021.102726
Hepperlen TW, Mardis HK, Kammandel H. The pigtail ureteral stent in the cancer patient. J Urol 1979; 148:17-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(17)56643-4
Young M, Leslie SW. Percutaneous nephrostomy. Treasure Island (FL), StatPearls Publishing; 2024.
Lloyd SN, Tirukonda P, Biyani CS, et al. The detour extra-anatomic stent--a permanent solution for benign and malignant ureteric obstruction? Eur Urol. 2007; 52:193-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2006.11.008
Chong JJY, Kum F, Hadjipavlou M, et al. Extra-anatomic stents in ureteric obstruction: our experience. J Endourol. 2019; 33:242-247. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2018.0610
Desgrandchamps F, Leroux S, Ravery V, et al. Subcutaneous pyelovesical bypass as replacement for standard percutaneous nephrostomy for palliative urinary diversion: prospective evaluation of patient's quality of life. J Endourol. 2007; 21:173-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2006.0194
Tahir W, Hakeem A, White A, et al. Extra-anatomic stent (EAS) as a salvage procedure for transplant ureteric stricture. Am J Transplant. 2014; 14:1927-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.12778
Azhar RA, Hassanain M, Aljiffry M, et al. Successful salvage of kidney allografts threatened by ureteral stricture using pyelovesical bypass. Am J Transplant. 2010; 10:1414-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2010.03137.x
Muller CO, Meria P, Desgrandchamps F. Long-term outcome of subcutaneous pyelovesical bypass in extended ureteral stricture after renal transplantation. J Endourol. 2011; 25:1389-92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2011.0085
Boyle HJ, Alibhai S, Decoster L, et al. Updated recommendations of the International Society of Geriatric Oncology on prostate cancer management in older patients. Eur J Cancer. 2019; 116:116-136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2019.04.031
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004; 240:205-213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae
Tatenuma T, Tsutsumi S, Yasui M, et al. Outcome of palliative urinary diversion and observation for malignant extrinsic ureteral obstruction. J Palliat Med. 2020; 23:254-258. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/jpm.2019.0038
Lapitan MC, Buckley BS. Impact of palliative urinary diversion by percutaneous nephrostomy drainage and ureteral stenting among patients with advanced cervical cancer and obstructive uropathy: a prospective cohort. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2011; 37:1061-1070. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1447-0756.2010.01486.x
Cordeiro MD, Coelho RF, Chade DC, et al. A prognostic model for survival after palliative urinary diversion for malignant ureteric obstruction: a prospective study of 208 patients. BJU Int. 2016;117:266-271. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12963
Perri T, Meller E, Ben-Baruch G, et al. Palliative urinary diversion in patients with malignant ureteric obstruction due to gynaecological cancer. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2022; 12:e855-e861. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjspcare-2019-001771
Heo JE, Jeon DY, Lee J, et al. Clinical outcomes after urinary diversion for malignant ureteral obstruction secondary to nonurologic cancer: an analysis of 778 cases. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28:2367-2373. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-09423-4
Joshi HB, Adams S, Obadeyi OO, Rao PN. Nephrostomy tube or 'JJ' ureteric stent in ureteric obstruction: assessment of patient perspectives using quality-of-life survey and utility analysis. Eur Urol. 2001; 39:695-701. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000052529
Zhang KP, Zhang Y, Chao M. Which is the best way for patients with ureteral obstruction? Percutaneous nephrostomy versus double J stenting. Medicine (Baltimore). 2022; 101:e31194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000031194
Heidenreich A, Ohlmann C, Braun M. Palliative subkutane Harnableitung bei maligner Ureterobstruktion (Detour-System) (Palliative subcutaneous urinary diversion in malignant ureteral obstruction (detour system)). Aktuelle Urol. 2004; 35:429-441. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2004-830087
Andonian S, Zorn KC, Paraskevas S, Anidjar M. Artificial ureters in renal transplantation. Urology. 2005; 66:1109. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2005.05.012
Lingam K, Paterson PJ, Lingam MK, et al. Subcutaneous urinary diversion: an alternative to percutaneous nephrostomy. J Urol. 1994;152:70-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(17)32819-7
Ahmadzadeh M. Clinical experience with subcutaneous urinary diversion: new approach using a double pigtail stent. Br J Urol. 1991; 67:596-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.1991.tb15222.x
Nakada SY, Gerber AJ, Wolf JS Jr, et al. Subcutaneous urinary diversion utilizing a nephrovesical stent: a superior alternative to long-term external drainage? Urology. 1995; 45:538-541. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-4295(99)80033-8
Wrona AJ, Zgajewski J, Kopec N, et al. Subcutaneous pyelovesical bypass - Detour bypass - as a solution for ureteric obstruction. Cent European J Urol. 2017; 70:429-433.
Nouaille A, Descazeaud A, Desgrandchamps F, et al. Morbidity and long-term results of subcutaneous pyelovesical bypass in chronic ureteral obstruction. Prog Urol. 2021; 31:348-356. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.purol.2020.12.016
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
PAGEPress has chosen to apply the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all manuscripts to be published.