Ureterocalicostomy

A contemporary experience

Brian Matlaga, Ojas D. Shah, Dinesh Singh, Stevan B. Streem, Dean G. Assimos

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

To report our contemporary experience with ureterocalicostomy to determine whether the indications or results have changed in modern practice. Ureterocalicostomy is a well-established treatment for patients with complicated ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction and other forms of proximal ureteral obstruction. Although both retrograde and antegrade endourologic interventions have become accepted forms of management, the success rates do not approach those of open or even laparoscopic interventions, potentially leading to a greater number of patients with treatment failure and the need for more complicated reconstruction. Between July 1991 and February 2004, 11 patients (4 women and 7 men), aged 19 to 68 years (mean 38), underwent open surgical ureterocalicostomy. The indications for surgery were primary UPJ obstruction in 4, failed cutting balloon incision for UPJ obstruction in 3, proximal ureteral stricture after ureteroscopic stone removal in 2, and obliterated UPJ after percutaneous nephrolithotomy and failed antegrade endopyelotomy in 1 patient each. Hospitalization ranged from 4 to 7 days (mean 5.1). No patient experienced a significant perioperative complication. With follow-up ranging from 5 to 32 months (mean 10.1), relief of obstruction was evident in all patients as documented by intravenous urography or nuclear renography. Furthermore, differential function on the involved side improved from a mean of 54.6% preoperatively to 60.1% postoperatively (P

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)42-44
Number of pages3
JournalUrology
Volume65
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Radioisotope Renography
Percutaneous Nephrostomy
Ureteral Obstruction
Urography
Treatment Failure
Pathologic Constriction
Hospitalization
Therapeutics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Matlaga, B., Shah, O. D., Singh, D., Streem, S. B., & Assimos, D. G. (2005). Ureterocalicostomy: A contemporary experience. Urology, 65(1), 42-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2004.08.024

Ureterocalicostomy : A contemporary experience. / Matlaga, Brian; Shah, Ojas D.; Singh, Dinesh; Streem, Stevan B.; Assimos, Dean G.

In: Urology, Vol. 65, No. 1, 01.2005, p. 42-44.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Matlaga, B, Shah, OD, Singh, D, Streem, SB & Assimos, DG 2005, 'Ureterocalicostomy: A contemporary experience', Urology, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 42-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2004.08.024
Matlaga, Brian ; Shah, Ojas D. ; Singh, Dinesh ; Streem, Stevan B. ; Assimos, Dean G. / Ureterocalicostomy : A contemporary experience. In: Urology. 2005 ; Vol. 65, No. 1. pp. 42-44.
@article{24651ddc31a74caa93d18bf747ed3d1d,
title = "Ureterocalicostomy: A contemporary experience",
abstract = "To report our contemporary experience with ureterocalicostomy to determine whether the indications or results have changed in modern practice. Ureterocalicostomy is a well-established treatment for patients with complicated ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction and other forms of proximal ureteral obstruction. Although both retrograde and antegrade endourologic interventions have become accepted forms of management, the success rates do not approach those of open or even laparoscopic interventions, potentially leading to a greater number of patients with treatment failure and the need for more complicated reconstruction. Between July 1991 and February 2004, 11 patients (4 women and 7 men), aged 19 to 68 years (mean 38), underwent open surgical ureterocalicostomy. The indications for surgery were primary UPJ obstruction in 4, failed cutting balloon incision for UPJ obstruction in 3, proximal ureteral stricture after ureteroscopic stone removal in 2, and obliterated UPJ after percutaneous nephrolithotomy and failed antegrade endopyelotomy in 1 patient each. Hospitalization ranged from 4 to 7 days (mean 5.1). No patient experienced a significant perioperative complication. With follow-up ranging from 5 to 32 months (mean 10.1), relief of obstruction was evident in all patients as documented by intravenous urography or nuclear renography. Furthermore, differential function on the involved side improved from a mean of 54.6{\%} preoperatively to 60.1{\%} postoperatively (P",
author = "Brian Matlaga and Shah, {Ojas D.} and Dinesh Singh and Streem, {Stevan B.} and Assimos, {Dean G.}",
year = "2005",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.urology.2004.08.024",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "65",
pages = "42--44",
journal = "Urology",
issn = "0090-4295",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ureterocalicostomy

T2 - A contemporary experience

AU - Matlaga, Brian

AU - Shah, Ojas D.

AU - Singh, Dinesh

AU - Streem, Stevan B.

AU - Assimos, Dean G.

PY - 2005/1

Y1 - 2005/1

N2 - To report our contemporary experience with ureterocalicostomy to determine whether the indications or results have changed in modern practice. Ureterocalicostomy is a well-established treatment for patients with complicated ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction and other forms of proximal ureteral obstruction. Although both retrograde and antegrade endourologic interventions have become accepted forms of management, the success rates do not approach those of open or even laparoscopic interventions, potentially leading to a greater number of patients with treatment failure and the need for more complicated reconstruction. Between July 1991 and February 2004, 11 patients (4 women and 7 men), aged 19 to 68 years (mean 38), underwent open surgical ureterocalicostomy. The indications for surgery were primary UPJ obstruction in 4, failed cutting balloon incision for UPJ obstruction in 3, proximal ureteral stricture after ureteroscopic stone removal in 2, and obliterated UPJ after percutaneous nephrolithotomy and failed antegrade endopyelotomy in 1 patient each. Hospitalization ranged from 4 to 7 days (mean 5.1). No patient experienced a significant perioperative complication. With follow-up ranging from 5 to 32 months (mean 10.1), relief of obstruction was evident in all patients as documented by intravenous urography or nuclear renography. Furthermore, differential function on the involved side improved from a mean of 54.6% preoperatively to 60.1% postoperatively (P

AB - To report our contemporary experience with ureterocalicostomy to determine whether the indications or results have changed in modern practice. Ureterocalicostomy is a well-established treatment for patients with complicated ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction and other forms of proximal ureteral obstruction. Although both retrograde and antegrade endourologic interventions have become accepted forms of management, the success rates do not approach those of open or even laparoscopic interventions, potentially leading to a greater number of patients with treatment failure and the need for more complicated reconstruction. Between July 1991 and February 2004, 11 patients (4 women and 7 men), aged 19 to 68 years (mean 38), underwent open surgical ureterocalicostomy. The indications for surgery were primary UPJ obstruction in 4, failed cutting balloon incision for UPJ obstruction in 3, proximal ureteral stricture after ureteroscopic stone removal in 2, and obliterated UPJ after percutaneous nephrolithotomy and failed antegrade endopyelotomy in 1 patient each. Hospitalization ranged from 4 to 7 days (mean 5.1). No patient experienced a significant perioperative complication. With follow-up ranging from 5 to 32 months (mean 10.1), relief of obstruction was evident in all patients as documented by intravenous urography or nuclear renography. Furthermore, differential function on the involved side improved from a mean of 54.6% preoperatively to 60.1% postoperatively (P

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=12844286812&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=12844286812&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.urology.2004.08.024

DO - 10.1016/j.urology.2004.08.024

M3 - Article

VL - 65

SP - 42

EP - 44

JO - Urology

JF - Urology

SN - 0090-4295

IS - 1

ER -