Department of Urology, Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, 230601, China.
Department of Urology, Zhong Mei Kuang Jian Zong Hospital, Suzhou, 234000, China.
World J Urol. 2024 Sep 20;42(1):528. doi: 10.1007/s00345-024-05230-8.
The management of long-segment ureteral stenosis has posed a significant challenge for urologists. Ureteroplasty with oral mucosal graft has emerged as an effective approach for treating long-segment ureteral stenosis and defects. A key step in replacement repair surgery involves suturing the surrounding tissue with an adequate blood supply around the reconstructed ureter. The current study aims to evaluate the potential practical application of the "perinephric fat wrapping" technique in laparoscopic ureteroplasty with oral mucosal graft.
Between July 2018 and February 2023, 26 patients with ureteral stenosis underwent laparoscopic ureteroplasty with oral mucosal graft at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University. We used traditional omental wrapping technique (OW group) or perinephric fat wrapping technique (PFW group) to enhance ureter repair. Perioperative and follow-up data for both groups were collected retrospectively and compared.
There were 10 patients in OW group, including 4 males and 6 females, with BMI of 23.5±2.8 kg/m2 and stenosis length of 3.6±1.6 cm. There were 16 patients in the PFW group, including 10 males and 6 females, with a BMI of 26.1±3.3 kg/m2 and a median stenosis length of 2.3 cm (range, 1.26.0 cm). The operation of both groups was successfully completed, and no serious complications occurred during the operation. The mean operating time (OT) in the OW group was 200.6±41.9 min, the estimated amount of blood loss (EBL) was 25 ml (range, 1030ml), and the median length of postoperative hospital stay (LHS) was 7.5 days (range 4.014.0 days). In the PFW group, the mean operating time (OT) was 211.9±38.3 min, the estimated blood loss (EBL) was 25 ml (range, 5150ml), and the postoperative hospital stay (LHS) was 6.8±2.0 d. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the above indexes. Postoperative anal exhaust time was 1.0 d (range, 1.0~2.5d) in the PFW group and 1.9±0.5 d in the OW group, with significant difference between the two groups (P=0.009). The mean follow-up time was 36.8±15.9 months, and there was no significant difference between OW group and PFW group in the curative effect of operation.
Perinephric fat wrapping technique not only avoids the potential effects of using omentum on abdominal organs, it is also as safe and effective as omentum wrapping technique in repairing and reconstructing the ureter using oral mucosal grafts.
长段输尿管狭窄的治疗一直是泌尿科医生面临的重大挑战。带口腔黏膜移植物的输尿管成形术已成为治疗长段输尿管狭窄和缺损的有效方法。在替代修复手术中,关键步骤是用周围组织缝合重建输尿管周围有足够血液供应的部位。本研究旨在评估“肾周脂肪包裹”技术在腹腔镜下带口腔黏膜移植物输尿管成形术中的潜在实际应用。
2018 年 7 月至 2023 年 2 月,安徽医科大学第二附属医院对 26 例输尿管狭窄患者行腹腔镜下带口腔黏膜移植物输尿管成形术。我们使用传统的网膜包裹技术(OW 组)或肾周脂肪包裹技术(PFW 组)来增强输尿管修复。回顾性收集两组患者的围手术期和随访资料并进行比较。
OW 组 10 例,男 4 例,女 6 例,BMI 为 23.5±2.8kg/m2,狭窄长度为 3.6±1.6cm。PFW 组 16 例,男 10 例,女 6 例,BMI 为 26.1±3.3kg/m2,狭窄长度中位数为 2.3cm(范围 1.26.0cm)。两组手术均顺利完成,术中无严重并发症发生。OW 组的平均手术时间(OT)为 200.6±41.9min,估计失血量(EBL)为 25ml(范围 1030ml),术后平均住院时间(LHS)为 7.5 天(范围 4.014.0 天)。PFW 组的平均手术时间(OT)为 211.9±38.3min,估计失血量(EBL)为 25ml(范围 5150ml),术后住院时间(LHS)为 6.8±2.0d。两组上述指标差异均无统计学意义。PFW 组术后肛门排气时间为 1.0d(范围 1.0~2.5d),OW 组为 1.9±0.5d,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P=0.009)。OW 组和 PFW 组的平均随访时间分别为 36.8±15.9 个月和 36.8±15.9 个月,两组手术疗效差异无统计学意义。
肾周脂肪包裹技术不仅避免了使用大网膜对腹部器官的潜在影响,而且在使用口腔黏膜移植物修复和重建输尿管方面与网膜包裹技术同样安全有效。