Robot-assisted transperitoneal reconstruction of a retrocaval ureter: A report of two cases.

A retrocaval ureter (RCU) is a rare cause of congenital ureteral obstruction that often requires surgical repair. We report two cases of RCU in adults treated with robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. In both cases, we performed robotic ureteroureterostomy with dissection of the entire length of the retrocaval portion of the right ureter without complications. In the second case, renal stone removal was simultaneously performed. The robot-assisted procedure we performed could be considered safe and feasible for the surgical repair of an RCU.

Transperitoneal laparoscopic ureteropyeloplasty of retrocaval ureter: Single surgeon experience and review of literature.

INTRODUCTION: Retrocaval ureter (RCU) is a rare congenital abnormality, secondary to anomalous development of inferior vena cava (IVC) presenting as ipsilateral obstruction needing surgical intervention. The aim of this article is to present surgical techniques and outcome of transperitoneal laparoscopic ureteropyeloplasty in patients with RCU treated by a single surgeon at a tertiary care center and with review of literature. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, institutional review board approved chart review of patients who underwent transperitoneal laparoscopic ureteropyeloplasty for RCU at our unit between January 2010 and December 2020. A total of 10 patients were identified. Preoperative evaluation involved a computed tomography-intravenous urography in addition to the conventional evaluation. All the patients underwent dismembered transperitoneal laparoscopic ureteropyeloplasty over a Double J stent. Data analyzed included the demographic profile, operative time difficulty if any, postoperative, intraoperative complications and functional outcome. RESULTS: All cases were completed laparoscopically and no open conversion was required. Average operating time was 96.6 minutes ± 8.16. Average blood loss was 71 ± 14.49 mL with an analgesia requirement of 115 ± 33.74 mg. One patient developed postoperative urinary leak and responded to percutaneous nephrostomy drainage. Patients were followed up for 3 to 12 months with a serial ultrasound and a follow-up diethylene-triamine-penta-acetic acid renal scan at 3 months to rule out any anastomotic site obstruction. CONCLUSION: Transperitoneal laparoscopic ureteropyeloplasty for RCU was associated with minimal morbidity and good outcomes.

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retroperitoneal laparoscopy in treatment of retrocaval ureter with right renal and ureteral calculi: a case report.

Retrocaval ureter is a rare disease associated with abnormal embryonic development. Here, we describe a patient who exhibited retrocaval ureter complicated by renal and ureteral calculi, which were treated by percutaneous nephrolithotomy combined with retroperitoneal laparoscopy. A 64-year-old man was admitted to our hospital because of intermittent back pain that had been present for more than 10 years. During hospitalization, he was diagnosed with retrocaval ureter, right renal calculi, and right ureteral calculi with right hydronephrosis; he underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy combined with retroperitoneal laparoscopic surgery. After the operation, his condition was stable and he exhibited good recovery. Our findings in this case suggest that percutaneous nephrolithotomy combined with retroperitoneal laparoscopy is a suitable option for the treatment of retrocaval ureter with renal and ureteral calculi.

Laparoscopic retroperitoneal approach for retrocaval ureter in children.

PURPOSE: Retrocaval ureter (RCU) is a rare congenital anomaly and published data on pediatric laparoscopic management are poor. The aim of this study was to report our experience of retroperitoneal laparoscopic approach for management of RCU in children. METHODS: A retrospective review of data from patients treated for RCU between 2002 and 2018 in our institution was performed. All patients were positioned in a flank position and underwent a three-port (5-mm optical trocar and two 3-mm trocars) laparoscopic retroperitoneal ureteroureterostomy. Anastomosis was made by 6/0 absorbable sutures. A JJ stent was always inserted. RESULTS: Five patients with a median age of 94 months (5-152) were operated on and followed up for a median time of 103 months (46-201). Median operating time was 200 min (160-270). No conversion and no transfusion occurred. Median hospital stay was 2 days (1-4). Ureteral stent was removed after 52 days (47-82). Complications included pyelonephretis (N = 1). In all cases, hydronephrosis decreased postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Retroperitoneal laparoscopic approach for RCU is safe and effective in children. Our video demonstrates different patients with specific surgical details to show how to manage these children. The global vision of the upper tract by laparoscopy leads to optimal management of these children even if the anomaly was not detected preoperatively.

Retrocaval ureter: a rare cause of intermittent right flank pain in a 37 years old lady.

A 37 years old female presented with 6 months history of intermittent right flank pain. She was otherwise fit and had no other complaints. Her lab investigations were normal. Abdominal ultrsonography revealed moderate hydronephrosis and proximal hydroureter but no calculus. Retrograde ureteropyelography findings were consistent with the diagnosis of retrocaval ureter, a rare clinical condition. Surgical exploration confirmed the presence of right retrocaval ureter. The ureter was transected and transposed anterior to inferior vena cava and ureteropelvic anastomosis was performed. Postoperative recovery was uneventful.

Transperitoneal laparoscopic ureteroureterostomy with excision of the compressed ureter for retrocaval ureter and review of literature.

Purpose: We present surgical techniques and operative results of laparoscopic reconstruction for patients with retrocaval ureter (RCU) and review similar papers. Materials and Methods: Ten patients with RCU were enrolled in this study from April 2005 to January 2017. The mean age of 7 males and 3 females was 40.5 years old. The chief complaint was flank pain in 6 patients; the remaining patients were detected incidentally. All patients showed hydronephrosis and typical S-shaped deformity of the ureter on imaging studies. Five patients showed obstructed patterns on the renal scans. Two surgeons performed laparoscopic ureteroureterostomies with transperitoneal approaches including excision of the compressed ureter. Double-J ureteral stents were inserted intraoperatively. The operative and follow-up results were checked and compared with published papers. Results: All laparoscopic reconstructions were successfully completed without conversion to open surgery. The mean operative time was 199.6 minutes. The estimated blood loss was 154.4 mL. No operative complications were encountered. There were no obstruction and symptom after the mean follow-up of 40.7 months. We found 7 papers from PubMed, which had more than five cases of laparoscopic reconstruction of RCU. We reviewed and summarized the clinical and operative parameters. Conclusions: Our results show that transperitoneal laparoscopic ureteroureterostomy with excision of the compressed ureter is a safe and effective treatment for RCU. Data from published papers and ours summarize clinical parameters of RCU, and suggest that the laparoscopic reconstruction can be considered as the standard treatment for it.

Laparoscopic and robotic-assisted repair of retrocaval ureter in children: a multi-institutional comparative study with open repair.

PURPOSE: This retrospective study aimed to report a multi-institutional experience with laparoscopic and robotic-assisted repair of retrocaval ureter in children and to compare outcome of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) with open repair. METHODS: The records of all children, who underwent MIS and open repair of retrocaval ureters in six international pediatric urology units over a 5-year period, were retrospectively collected. Data were grouped according to the operative approach: a laparoscopic group (G1) included five patients, a robotic-assisted group (G2) included four patients, and an open group (G3) included three patients. The groups were compared in regard to operative and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: At follow-up, all patients (one G1 patient after redo-surgery) reported complete resolution of symptoms and radiologic improvement of hydronephrosis and obstruction. In regard to postoperative complications, one G1 patient developed stenosis of anastomosis and needed re-operation with no further recurrence (IIIb Clavien). G2 reported the lowest average operative time (135 min) compared to G1 (178.3 min) and G3 (210 min). MIS (G1-G2) reported a significantly better postoperative outcome compared to open repair (G3) in terms of analgesic requirements, hospitalization, and cosmetic results. CONCLUSIONS: The study outcomes suggest that MIS should be the first choice for retrocaval ureter because of the minimal invasiveness and the better cosmetic outcome compared to open surgery. Furthermore, our results showed that robotic-assisted reconstruction was technically easier, safer, and quicker compared to laparoscopic repair, and for these reasons, it should be preferentially adopted, when available.

Retrocaval Ureter Manifested after Ureteral Reimplantation for Ipsilateral Vesicoureteral Reflux: A Case Report.

We report a female patient diagnosed with retrocaval ureter (RCU) after ureteral reimplantation for vesicoureteral reflux (VUR). She was diagnosed as right grade IV VUR with breakthrough urinary tract infections, and underwent ureteral reimplantation with Cohen cross-trigonal technique. Thereafter, she developed severe right hydronephrosis associated with RCU, which was presumably due to caudal traction of right ureter at ureteral reimplantation. Sheunderwent uretero-ureterostomy anterior to the inferior vena cava, and recovered well. Detailed evaluation for upper urinary tract is mandatory for high grade VUR, and Cohen technique should be avoided for VUR associated with RCU.

[Ureteral Cancer Developing in Retrocaval Ureter : A Case Report].

Ureteral cancer in the retrocaval ureter is rare. We herein report a patient with this condition laparoscopically treated. A 69-year-old man was referred to us because of right ureteral cancer diagnosed during ureteroscopic surgery for a ureteral calculus. Histological diagnosis of the ureteroscopically biopsied material was non-invasive papillary urothelial carcinoma, low grade (G2). Computed tomography (CT) demonstrated a retrocaval ureter : a double J stent placed during ureteroscopy assisted the diagnosis. The patient underwent retroperitoneoscopic complete nephroureterectomy on the right side. Sufficient separation of the right ureter and the inferior vena cava under retroperitoneoscopic procedures facilitated en bloc extirpation of the kidney and ureter with a minimal lower abdominal incision. The surgical procedures for ureteral cancer in the retrocaval ureter, should be preoperatively considered with care.

Variable presentation of retrocaval ureter: Report of four cases and review of literature.

Retrocaval ureter is a rare anomaly in which the ureter passes behind the inferior vena cava due to abnormal embryogenesis. Very few cases have been reported from Africa. Although the anomaly is congenital, patients become symptomatic in the third or fourth decade of life. We reviewed the records of four patients with the diagnosis of retrocaval ureter and managed in our centre between January 2010 and December 2016. Three patients presented with recurrent colicky right flank pain while one was asymptomatic. Two patients each had Type I and Type II retrocaval ureters, respectively. Surgical repairs were achieved in the three symptomatic cases and recovery was uneventful. Retrocaval ureter, though congenital, manifests in young adults and it may be symptomatic. Pre-operative diagnosis may be difficult when the lesion is high and mimics pelviureteric junction obstruction. Thus, a high index of suspicion is required for pre-operative diagnosis. Under-reporting and asymptomatic cases may account for the low incidence.

[Laparoscopic antevasal uretero-ureteral anastomosis for treating retrocaval ureter].

The article presents a case of laparoscopic antevasal correction of the retrocaval ureter in a 16 year old patient, who was admitted to the hospital with complaints of aching pain in the right lower back. His history was noteworthy of early age onset of intermittent fever accompanied by abdominal and lumbar pain. Blood count and urinalysis were within normal limits, and he was treated symptomatically. However, no renal ultrasound scan was done. Intravenous urography and MSCT showed a retrocaval ureter. The diagnosis was confirmed by retrograde ureteropyelography. With the patient placed in the lateral position, the right ureter was mobilized by transperitoneal access, transected and mobilized from under the inferior vena cava. Anterior uretero-ureteral anastomosis on the stent was performed, drainage was established. The operating time was 90 minutes, blood loss was 60 ml. There were no postoperative complications. Drainage was removed 2 days after surgery and the patient was discharged for outpatient treatment. The stent was removed 6 weeks postoperatively. Control urography showed normal function of both kidneys, no urodynamic abnormality of the upper urinary tract was identified.

Retrocaval ureter and contra lateral renal agenesis - a case report and review of literature.

Associated congenital anomalies are seen in 21% of retrocaval ureter patients; among them, associated contralateral renal agenesis is a very rare entity. We report one such case of right circumcaval ureter with left renal agenesis, diagnosed after febrile UTI. Surgical correction with uretero-ureterostomy was successful. In literature very few such cases are reported and only one case with renal failure was reported. Unilateral renal agenesis cases complicated by associated such anomalies need definitive management and lifelong clinical monitoring to diagnose and prevent chronic kidney disease.

Retrocaval ureter and contra lateral renal agenesis – a case report and review of literature

ABSTRACT Associated congenital anomalies are seen in 21% of retrocaval ureter patients; among them, associated contralateral renal agenesis is a very rare entity. We report one such case of right circumcaval ureter with left renal agenesis, diagnosed after febrile UTI. Surgical correction with uretero-ureterostomy was successful. In literature very few such cases are reported and only one case with renal failure was reported. Unilateral renal agenesis cases complicated by associated such anomalies need definitive management and lifelong clinical monitoring to diagnose and prevent chronic kidney disease.

Retroperitoneoscopic ureteroplasty for retrocaval ureter: report of nine cases and literature review.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to report the experience of retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureteroplasty for nine cases of retrocaval ureter. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Six males and three females were referred with a diagnosis of retrocaval ureter. A retroperitoneal laparoscopic approach was taken in all patients, who were diagnosed by intravenous pyelography (IVP), computed tomography urography and retrograde pyelography. After the dilated proximal ureter was mobilized, the ureter was transected just above the retrocaval segment, which was repositioned to the anterior of the vena cava. The retrocaval segment was observed and evaluated to enable a decision as to whether or not to reserve. Then, tension-free, water-tight anastomosis was performed with absorbable sutures using intracorporeal suturing techniques over a double-J stent, which was laparoscopically inserted in an antegrade manner. The stent was removed 4-6 weeks postoperatively. RESULTS: The ureteroplasty was accomplished in all cases. The retrocaval segment of the ureter was reserved with a grossly normal appearance in six cases; the abnormal retrocaval segment was excised in the three other cases. The mean operative duration was 103 min (range 89-110 min) and the mean hospital stay was 7 days (range 6-9 days). No serious complications occurred. Follow-up by ultrasonography and IVP, lasting 6 months to 4 years, revealed considerable improvement in hydronephrosis and upper ureteral dilatation. No ureteral stenosis was found at the anastomotic site. CONCLUSION: Retroperitoneoscopic ureteroplasty should be recommended as the first line treatment for retrocaval ureter because of its advantages of minimal invasion and shorter hospital stay than open surgery. Skilled laparoscopic anastomosis with a retroperitoneal approach can shorten the operative duration.

Uréter retrocavo no obstructivo junto con megauréter terminal. Aporte de un caso / Retrocaval non-obstructive ureter and terminal megaureter. Case report

No disponible

Right sided double inferior vena cava with obstructed retrocaval ureter: Managed with single incision multiple port laparoscopic technique using "Santosh Postgraduate Institute tacking ureteric fixation technique".

Right double inferior vena cava with obstructed retrocaval ureter is an extremely rare anomaly with only a few reported cases in the literature. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case report describing ureteric repair by use of a single-incision laparoscopic technique. In addition, this report addresses the underlying surgical challenges of this repair and provides a brief review of the embryology of this anomaly. The "Santosh Postgraduate Institute ureteric tacking fixation technique" provides ease of end-to-end uretero-ureteric anastomosis in a single-incision laparoscopic surgery.

[Transperitoneal and retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureteroureterostomy for retrocaval ureter].

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the results of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureteroureterostomy procedure in the treatment of patients with retrocaval ureter. METHODS: From May 2004 to December 2012, 18 patients including 12 male and 6 female patients were operated for retrocaval ureter, the average age was (37 ± 10) years (range 17-55 years). Eight patients underwent transperitoneal laparoscopic ureteroureterostomy (transperitoneal laparoscopic group), and the other 10 patients' laparoscopic procedure were performed via retroperitoneal approach(retroperitoneal laparoscopic group). These patients' records were retrospectively analyzed for perioperative characteristics, complications and follow-up results. A two-tailed Student's t-test was used to compare perioperative data between the two groups. RESULTS: Technical success was acquired in all 18 laparoscopic procedures. Mean operative time of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal laparoscopic group was (85 ± 20) minutes (60-130 minutes) and (98 ± 30) minutes (70-180 minutes) , respectively. There was no difference in operation time between the two groups (t = 1.03, P > 0.05). The blood loss was less than 50 ml in all the patients. Comparison of anal exhaust time between the two groups showed no statistic difference (t = 0.16, P > 0.05). No perioperative complication was observed. Intravenous pyelography or CT urography 3 months after the operation revealed a widely patent anastomosis with considerable improvement in hydronephrosis in all patients. There was no recurrence at a mean follow up of (40 ± 24) months (range 12-115 months). CONCLUSION: Both transperitoneal and retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureteroureterostomy are effective and minimally invasive surgical alternative for the management of retrocaval ureter.