Outcome of Transperitoneal Laparoscopic Ureterolithotomy (TPLU) for proximal ureteral stone > 15 mm: Our experience with 60 cases
https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2021.3.330
Accepted: July 9, 2021
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.
Purpose: We aim to review our experience of transperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (TPLU) for proximal ureteric stone more than 15 mm.
Patients and methods: Between June 2017 to December 2020, sixty patients with a history of unsuccessful Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and/or failed ureteroscopy for impacted ureteral calculi more than 15 mm who accepted TPLU were enrolled in our study. The patients' demographic information and post-treatment results were gathered and analyzed, retrospectively.
Results: The patients' mean age was 46.25 ± 12.56 years. The mean size of the stone was 20.11 ± 4.76 mm. 37 (61.7%) patients had severe hydronephrosis (HDN) and 46 (76.7%) stones were radio-opaque. Almost all of the patients underwent TPLU by a single urologist. The mean operation time was 72.86 ± 6.07 minutes without intraoperative complication (only 3 stones had upward migration to the pyelocaliceal system). The main operative blood loss was 88.86 ml. The average length of stay in the hospital was 45.8 ± 8.11 hours. The stone free rate (SFR) at discharge was 57 (95%). The overall complication rate was 27 (45%). Regarding early complications, fever was found in 8 (13.3%) patients, and 3 patients (5%) had paralytic ileus. The rate of urine leak was 8.3%, and 8 (13.3%) patients required blood transfusions. In multivariate analysis, the multiple stones, bigger stone in size, incomplete SFR, longer duration of hospital admission, and severe HDN were associated with a high early complication rate (p = 0.05, 0.04, < 001, 0.03, and 0.01, respectively).
Conclusions: TPLU is a harmless option for managing proximal ureteric stone as a primary procedure or salvage procedure with good outcomes and acceptable complication rates.
Skolarikos A, Papatsoris AG, Albanis S, Assimos D. Laparoscopic urinary stone surgery: an updated evidence-based review. Urol Res. 2010; 38:337-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-010-0275-4
El-Moula MG, Abdallah A, El-Anany F, et al. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: our experience with 74 cases. Int J Urol. 2008;15:593-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2042.2008.02065.x
Leonardo C, Simone G, Rocco P,, et al. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: minimally invasive second line treatment. Int Urol Nephrol. 2011; 43:651-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-010-9872-y
Al-Sayyad A. Laparoscopic transperitoneal ureterolithotomy for large ureteric stones. Urol Ann. 2012; 4:34-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-7796.91619
Ahmed F, Askarpour MR, Eslahi A, et al. The role of ultrasonography in detecting urinary tract calculi compared to CT scan. Res Rep Urol. 2018; 10:199-203.
Kartal I, Baylan B, Çakıcı M, et al. Comparison of semirigid ureteroscopy, flexible ureteroscopy, and shock wave lithotripsy for initial treatment of 11-20 mm proximal ureteral stones. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2020; 92:39-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2020.1.39
Hong Y, Ye H, Yang B, et al. Ultrasound-Guided Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy is Effective in the Management of Pediatric Upper Ureteral and Renal Stones. J Invest Surg. 2020:1-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08941939.2020.1764154
Ahmed F, Askarpour M-R, Eslahi A, et al. The role of ultrasonog raphy in detecting urinary tract calculi compared to CT scan. Res Rep Urol. 2018; 10:199. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S178902
Wani MM, Durrani AM. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: Experience of 60 cases from a developing world hospital. J Minim Access Surg. 2018; 15:103-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jmas.JMAS_203_17
Yasui T, Okada A, Hamamoto S, et al. Efficacy of retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for the treatment of large proximal ureteric stones and its impact on renal function. Springerplus 2013; 2:600. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-2-600
El-Nahas AR, El-Tabey NA, Eraky I, et al. Semirigid ureteroscopy for ureteral stones: a multivariate analysis of unfavorable results. J Urol. 2009; 181:1158-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.10.167
Chen H, Chen G, Chen H, et al. Comparison of the safety and efficacy between transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approach of laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for the treatment of large (>10mm) and proximal ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Urol J. 2020; 18:11-18.
El-Feel A, Abouel-Fettouh H, Abdel-Hakim AM. Laparoscopic transperitoneal ureterolithotomy. J Endourol. 2007; 21:50-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2006.0141
Yang H, Yu X, Peng E, et al. Urgent laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for proximal ureter stones accompanied with obstructive pyelonephritis: Is it safe and effective without preoperative drainage? Medicine (Baltimore). 2017; 96:e8657. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000008657
Nasseh H, Pourreza F, Kazemnejad Leyli E, et al. Laparoscopic transperitoneal ureterolithotomy: a single-center experience. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2013; 23:495-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2012.0187
Hsiao HL, Huang SP, Wu WJ, et al. Impact of hydronephrosis on treatment outcome of solitary proximal ureteral stone after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2008;24:507-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1607-551X(09)70009-9
Wani R, Para M. Transperitoneal laparoscopic management of ureteric stones: a prospective study. World journal of Minimal Access Surgery 2020, 8:1 (Monday, November 16, 2020).
Farooq Qadri SJ, Khan N, Khan M. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy--a single centre 10 year experience. Int J Surg. 2011; 9:160-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.10.012
Radfar MH, Valipour R, Narouie B, et al. Role of the gonadal vessels on the stone lodgment in the proximal ureter: Direct observation during laparoscopic ureterolithotomy. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2018; 90:163-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2018.3.163
Kadyan B, Sabale V, Mane D, et al. Large proximal ureteral stones: Ideal treatment modality? Urol Ann. 2016; 8:189-92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-7796.157963
Simforoosh N, Basiri A, Danesh AK, et al. Laparoscopic management of ureteral calculi: a report of 123 cases. Urol J. 2007;4:138-41.
You JH, Kim YG, Kim MK. Should we place ureteral stents in retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy?: Consideration of surgical techniques and complications. Korean J Urol. 2014; 55:511-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2014.55.8.511
Matias DB, Alvim RG, Ribas M, et al. Laparoscopic treatment of ureterolithiasis: our experience. Actas Urol Esp. 2009; 33:667-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0210-4806(09)74205-6
Derouiche A, Belhaj K, Garbouj N, et al. Retroperitoneal laparoscopy for the management of lumbar ureter stones. Prog Urol. 2008; 18:281-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.purol.2008.03.027
Gaur DD, Trivedi S, Prabhudesai MR, Madhusudhana HR, Gopichand M. AA. BJU Int. 2002; 89:339-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-4096.2001.01562.x
Keeley FX, Gialas I, Pillai M, et al. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: the Edinburgh experience. BJU Int. 1999; 84:765-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.00287.x
Khalil M, Omar R, Abdel-Baky S, et al. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy; which is better: Transperitoneal or retroperitoneal approach?Turk J Urol. 2015; 41:185-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2015.03442
Zhu W, Li J, Yuan J, Liu Y, et al. A prospective and randomised trial comparing fluoroscopic, total ultrasonographic, and combined guidance for renal access in mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy. BJU Int. 2017; 119:612-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13703
Singh V, Sinha RJ, Gupta DK, et al. Transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: a prospective randomized comparison study. J Urol. 2013; 189:940-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.09.114
Huri E, Basok EK, Ugurlu O, et al. Experiences in laparoscopic removal of upper ureteral stones: multicenter analysis of cases, based on the TurkUroLap Group. J Endourol. 2010; 24:1279-82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2009.0536
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.
Downloads
Citations
