Why the study?
The study was conducted to describe the diagnosis and different laparoscopic surgical approaches for patients with retrocaval ureter and share clinical experience from two cases.
Does laparoscopic treatment provide effective and safe management for patients with retrocaval ureter?
Does laparoscopic treatment provide effective and safe management for patients with retrocaval ureter?
Pure laparoscopic treatment appears feasible and technically reliable for the management of retrocaval ureter, offering advantages such as shorter hospital stay and less blood loss.
May support laparoscopic repair for retrocaval ureter; leaves open need for larger prospective studies.
OBJECTIVES: To expose the diagnosis and the different laparoscopic approaches for the surgical management of patients with retrocaval ureter (RCU) and to share our experience on two cases. METHODS: Updated literature review on Pubmed and debating personal experiences including ours (double j stent insertion before the surgery, use of 4 trocards, transperitoneal approach, pyelopyelostomy for the anastomosis…), concerning the laparoscopic treatment of the RCU. RESULTS: Laparoscopic treatment of RCU is a recommended management for many reasons: less blood loss during the surgery, a shorter hospital stay, less postoperative pain and superior esthetic results with excellent functional results. All of these findings were also a part of our experience on the two reported cases: operative time was 210 and 180 min with no significant bleeding, hospital stay was 48 h post operatively for both patients that were symptom free with no renal dilation after 2 years of close follow up. The main cause of the increased operating time is the intracorporeal anastomosis of the ureter which remains the main limiting factor of the laparoscopic surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The literature review has clearly shown the advantages of minimally invasive techniques for the treatment of retrocaval ureter. Pure laparoscopic treatment (as in our two cases), seems feasible and technically reliable, and should be the standard surgical option for the treatment of RCU.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abdessater et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: