A 44-year-old woman with end-stage renal disease underwent cadaver renal transplantation at another hospital. Two weeks after surgery, much clear fluid emerged from the operative wound. The patient visited our hospital and abdominal ultrasonography identified a fluid collection near the right perivesical space. A percutaneous nephrostomy was performed for urinary diversion. Antegrade pyelography showed renal pelvis distortion, an irregular surface along the entire ureter, and a severe stricture near the lower ureter, suggestive of massive ureteral necrosis of the graft. The initial treatment comprised resection of the necrotic ureter followed by an end-to-side pyeloureterostomy to join the graft renal pelvis to the middle portion of the ipsilateral native ureter. Although the postoperative period was initially unremarkable, delayed urine extravasation was noted on the fifth postoperative day. Antegrade pyelography revealed a 0.5-cm disruption gap between the graft renal pelvis and the native ureter (Fig. 1A). After discussion of the available treatment options with the patient, a metallic stent 6 mm in diameter and 30 mm in length (Wallstent; Schneider, Zurich, Switzerland) was inserted via a percutaneous antegrade approach to bridge the defect between the native ureter and graft renal pelvis. Subsequent recovery was uneventful, and antegrade pyelography showed that urine was no longer leaking from the disruption gap. The Wallstent was found to have remained in a good position (Fig. 1B) and the collecting system was patent without evidence of stone formation on three-dimensional computed tomography 10 months later. Over a 5-year follow-up period, the patient had stable renal function without sequelae.FIGURE 1.: (A) Antegrade pyelography showed a 0.5-cm ureteral disruption gap at the ureteropyelostomy anastomosis (black arrow) between the graft renal pelvis and native ureter (hollow arrow). (B) A metallic Wallstent (large arrow) was used to bridge the native ureter to the renal pelvis of the graft kidney. The small arrow indicates refluxing contrast medium in the upper portion of the right native ureter.With a reported incidence of 2.1%, ureteral necrosis is relatively uncommon after renal transplantation (1). Different techniques have been considered to repair the various types of ureteral injury. Pyeloureterostomy joining the graft pelvis to the distal portion of the native ureter is the preferred method when dealing with massive ureteral necrosis (1). Few reports have addressed further management when pyeloureterostomy fails. Antegrade or retrograde endourologic stent implantation may provide temporary relief of ureteral obstruction but can potentially lead to complications like stent encrustation or repeated urinary tract infections. Artificial ureteral replacement was successfully used in three patients with renal transplant ureteral necrosis in 1998 by Desgrandchamps et al. (2), who employed a minimally invasive technique originally described for the palliation of malignant ureteral obstructions. Based on a mean of 32-months of follow-up, the investigators concluded that the subcutaneous bypass is a simple and safe procedure, although late encrustation of the prosthesis remains a major concern. In our case, repeat operation of the disrupted pyeloureterostomy would have been difficult as a result of local inflammation. Likewise, a subcutaneous artificial ureteral replacement may not prevent persistent urine leakage from the disrupted anastomosis. Metal stents (e.g. Wallstents) are routinely used in the cardiovascular and biliary systems (3, 4) and have been deployed for malignant and benign ureteral obstruction with excellent results (5–7). The use of the technique presented in this case was able to bridge the defect caused by the disrupted pyeloureterostomy anastomosis, thereby avoiding further open surgery, with its associated morbidity. Because the presence of this new adynamic ureteral segment may cause morbidity such as stone formation in the future, regular follow-up of renal function and collecting system patency will remain crucial components in the ongoing management of this patient. Victor Chia-Hsiang Lin Division of Urology Department of Surgery E-Da HospitalI-Shou University Kaoshiung, Taiwan Alex Chien-Hwa Liao Division of Urology Department of Surgery Chi-Mei Medical Center Tainan, Taiwan Li-Ching Chang Division of Urology Department of Surgery E-Da HospitalI-Shou University Kaoshiung, Taiwan Wen-Sheng Tzeng Department of Radiology Chi-Mei Medical Center Tainan, Taiwan