Utilization of Non-Transecting Pyeloplasty Techniques for Management of Recurrent Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction

Abstract

Introduction: Cases of recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) in patients who underwent a prior failed pyeloplasty may pose a difficult challenge for urologists. The increased findings of periureteral fibrosis and scarring in a reoperative field may increase the risk of ureteral devascularization and stricture recurrence. The goal of this study is to demonstrate three robotic non-transecting pyeloplasty techniques for patients in this setting. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of our Collaborative of Reconstructive Robotic Ureteral Surgery (CORRUS) database for all consecutive patients between April 2012 and September 2019 who underwent a secondary pyeloplasty for management of a recurrent UPJO after prior failed pyeloplasty. Transecting (dismembered) and non-transecting pyeloplasty (YV plasty, buccal mucosa graft ureteroplasty onlay, or Heineke–Mikulicz) were the techniques used for secondary pyeloplasty. YV plasty was utilized in patients with high insertion UPJO without a redundant renal pelvis. A buccal mucosa graft ureteroplasty onlay was utilized for patients with nonobliterative long-segment UPJO and/or significant peri-ureteropelvic junction fibrosis. The Heineke–Mikulicz technique was utilized in patients with short-segment (≤1.5 cm) UPJO. Symptomatic absence of flank pain and radiographic obstruction (computed tomography urogram, renal scan, and/or renal ultrasound) were measures used to assess for postoperative success. Using a p < 0.05 for statistical significance, we used nonparametric independent sample median tests and chi-square tests to compare perioperative variables between transecting and non-transecting pyeloplasty. Results: Twenty-eight patients met the final inclusion criteria. Regarding preoperative variables, there was no difference in median operative time (p = 0.26) and estimated blood loss (p > 0.99) between both groups. In the non-transecting group, near-infrared fluorescence with indocyanine green was utilized more frequently (85.7% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.04). The non-transecting group also had a longer median stricture length (2.8 cm vs. 1.1 cm, p = 0.04). There was no difference in surgical success rates between both groups (85.7% for both groups, p > 0.99). Two patients who underwent a non-transecting buccal mucosa graft ureteroplasty onlay required postoperative management with percutaneous nephrostomy tubes caused by recurrent obstruction. Regarding postoperative variables, there was no difference in surgical success rates between both groups (p > 0.99). Conclusions: In patients with recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction after prior failed pyeloplasty, non-transecting pyeloplasty techniques, including YV plasty, buccal mucosa graft ureteroplasty onlay, and Heineke–Mikulicz pyeloplasty, are safe and feasible options. Given the potential technical challenges involved with secondary repair, non-transecting pyeloplasty techniques may offer benefits in reducing the risk of ureteral devascularization and preserving the fragile ureteral blood supply. J.J., M.L., J.K., and L.C.Z. have no conflicts of interest to disclose. M.D.S. is on the Scientific Advisory Board for Intuitive, a consultant for VTI Medical, and performs educational activities for Ethicon. D.D.E. is a paid speaker, consultant, and proctor for Intuitive Surgical, consultant for Johnson and Johnson, and founder/part owner of Melzi Corp. Authors have received and archived patient consent for video recording/publication in advance of video recording of procedure. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Temple University (protocol number 20793). Runtime of video: 7 mins 15 secs This material was presented at the American Urological Association Conference in 2021 (https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002052.04).