期刊文献+

二次肾盂成形术在复发性肾盂输尿管连接部梗阻中的研究进展 被引量:6

Advance in re-do pyeloplasty for the management of recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction after surgery
下载PDF
导出
摘要 肾盂输尿管连接部梗阻(ureteropelvic junction obstruction,UPJO)是一种常见的引起肾积水的上尿路梗阻性疾病。开放肾盂成形术是UPJO治疗的标准术式,但目前已逐渐被腹腔镜肾盂成形术等微创术式取代,且其成功率与开放肾盂成形术接近[1-2]。以往研究报道,肾盂成形术(包括开放和腹腔镜)有2.5%~10%的失败率[3-5]。 Ureteropelvic junction obstruction(UPJO)is characterized by decreased flow of urine down the ureter and increased fluid pressure inside the kidney.Open pyeloplasty had been regarded as the standard management of UPJO for a long time.Laparoscopic pyeloplasty reports high success rates,for both retroperitoneal and transperitoneal approaches,which are comparable to those of open pyeloplasty.However,open and laparoscopic pyeloplasty have yielded disappointing failure rates of 2.5%-10%.The main causes for recurrent UPJO are severe peripelvic and periureteric fibrosis due to urinary extravasation,ureteral ischemia,and inadequate hemostasis.In addition,failing to diagnose lower pole crossing vessels before or during the primary procedure is also responsible for recurrent UPJO.In addition,poor preoperative split renal function,hydronephrosis,presence of renal stones,patient age,diabetes,prior endopyelotomy history,and retrograde pyelography history were considered as predictors of pyeloplasty failure.The failure is usually defined by persistent pain,persistent radiographic obstruction(infection or stones),continued decline in split renal function,or a combination of the above.And the failure of pyeloplasty often occurs in the first 2 years after the surgery.The available options for managing recurrent UPJO with a salvageable renal unit include endopyelotomy,re-do pyeloplasty,stent implantation,percutaneous nephrostomy,ureterocalicostomy,and nephrectomy.Re-do pyeloplasty has such merits as high successful rates and rare complications,compared with endopyelotomy or ureterocalicostomy.And some investigators think that re-do pyeloplasty should be regarded as the gold standard for secondary therapy if feasible.Open pyeloplasty can enlarge the operating field,facilitate the exposure of the ureteropelvic junction,reduce the difficulty of operation,and thus reduce the occurrence of complications.There are no significant differences among the success rates of re-do pyeloplasty under open approach,traditional laparoscopy and robot-assisted laparoscopy,according to previous reports.However,traditional laparoscopic and robot-assisted pyeloplasty give advantages of cosmetology,small trauma,less postoperative pain,speedy recovery and shorter hospitalization,fewer complications and lower recurrent rates.If the primary pyeloplasty is an open operation in retroperitoneal approach,the traditional laparoscopic and robotic operation with retroperitoneal approach should be considered for secondary repair.The cause of recurrent UPJO should be evaluated before surgery and identified intraoperatively to minimize the possibility of recurrence.
作者 熊盛炜 王杰 朱伟杰 程嗣达 张雷 李学松 周利群 XIONG Sheng-wei;WANG Jie;ZHU Wei-jie;CHENG Si-da;ZHANG Lei;LI Xue-song;ZHOU Li-qun(Department of Urology,Peking University First Hospital,Institute of Urology,Peking University,National Urological Cancer Center,Beijing 100034,China)
出处 《北京大学学报(医学版)》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2020年第4期794-798,共5页 Journal of Peking University:Health Sciences
关键词 二次肾盂成形术 复发性 肾盂输尿管连接部梗阻 微创外科手术 Re-do pyeloplasty Recurrent Ureteropelvic junction obstruction Minimally invasive surgical procedures
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献21

  • 1Eden CG. Minimally invasive treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a critical analysis of results[J]. Eur Urol, 2007, 52 (4) : 983- 989.
  • 2EL-Shazly MA, Moon DA, Eden CG. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: status and review of literature[J]. Endourol J, 2007, 21 (7) : 673 - 678.
  • 3Rehman J, Landman J, Sundaram C, et al. Missed anterior.crossing vessels during open retroperitoneal pyeloplasty: laparoscopic transperitoneal discovery and repair[ J]. J Urol, 2001 , 166(2): 593 -596.
  • 4Jarrett TW, Chan DY, Charambura TC, et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: the first 100 cases[J]. J Urol, 2002, 167(3) : 1253 - 1256.
  • 5Eden CG, Cahill D, Allen JD. Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty: 50 consecutive cases[J]. BJU Int, 2001, 88(6) : 526 - 531.
  • 6Chandru PS, Robert LG, Jamil R, et al. Laparosscopic pyeloplasty for secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction [ J ]. J Urol, 2003, 169(6) : 2037 -2040.
  • 7Arun N, Kekre NS, Nath V, et al. Is open pyeloplasty still justified [J] .?BrJUrol, 1997, 80(3): 379 -381.
  • 8O' Reilly PH, Brooman PJ, Mak S, et al. The long-term results of Anderson-Hynes pyeloplasty [ J] . BJU Int, 2001,87 (4) : 287 - 289.
  • 9Brooks JD, Kavoussi LR, Preminger GM, et al. Comparison of open and endourologic approaches to the obstructed ureteropelvie junction[J]. Urology, 1995, 46(6): 791 -795.
  • 10Klingler HC, Remzi M, Janetschek G, et al. Comparison of open versus laparoscopie pyeloplasty techniques in treatment of uretero-pelvie junction obstruction [ J]. Eur Urol, 2003, 44 (3): 340-345.

共引文献36

同被引文献35

引证文献6

二级引证文献9

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部