Robotic excision and ureteroureterostomy of blind-ending ureteral ‘Duplication’

A. Satyanarayan, D. Preuss, T. D. Davis, Craig A Peters

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Introduction: Duplicated ureteral anatomy can be a reconstructive challenge. Blind-ending ureteral duplication has been reported with recommendations for surgical excision. Objective: This video reviews the importance of exposure of anatomic landmarks in surgical excision of a blind-ending ureteral duplication. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective case report of a patient who presented with a blind-ending ureteral duplication. Discussion: A 13-year-old female presented with a right-sided abdominal mass. Abdominal and pelvic imaging revealed a tubular structure adjacent to and below the right kidney, possibly connecting to the right lower pole. While initially observed, the patient re-presented with urosepsis. A retrograde pyelogram showed no connection between the right ureter and this structure. The patient underwent robotic-assisted excision of this structure. Intra-operatively, it was connected to the right lower pole calyces. A ureteroureterostomy to the orthotopic ureter was performed. Although the structure was adjacent to the bladder dome, there was no communication distally. Postoperatively, the patient did well; follow-up imaging showed a non-dilated lower pole. The pathology of this structure was benign urothelium. Conclusions: Surgical management of aberrant ureteral duplications should focus on identifying known landmarks and should be considered to prevent symptomatic infections and renal scarring.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Pediatric Urology
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Robotics
Ureter
Anatomic Landmarks
Kidney
Urothelium
Urography
Cicatrix
Anatomy
Urinary Bladder
Communication
Pathology
Infection

Keywords

  • Congenital anomaly
  • Robotics
  • Ureteral duplication

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
  • Urology

Cite this

Robotic excision and ureteroureterostomy of blind-ending ureteral ‘Duplication’. / Satyanarayan, A.; Preuss, D.; Davis, T. D.; Peters, Craig A.

In: Journal of Pediatric Urology, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{3e749a96b174444fb8aadc3a69649935,
title = "Robotic excision and ureteroureterostomy of blind-ending ureteral ‘Duplication’",
abstract = "Introduction: Duplicated ureteral anatomy can be a reconstructive challenge. Blind-ending ureteral duplication has been reported with recommendations for surgical excision. Objective: This video reviews the importance of exposure of anatomic landmarks in surgical excision of a blind-ending ureteral duplication. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective case report of a patient who presented with a blind-ending ureteral duplication. Discussion: A 13-year-old female presented with a right-sided abdominal mass. Abdominal and pelvic imaging revealed a tubular structure adjacent to and below the right kidney, possibly connecting to the right lower pole. While initially observed, the patient re-presented with urosepsis. A retrograde pyelogram showed no connection between the right ureter and this structure. The patient underwent robotic-assisted excision of this structure. Intra-operatively, it was connected to the right lower pole calyces. A ureteroureterostomy to the orthotopic ureter was performed. Although the structure was adjacent to the bladder dome, there was no communication distally. Postoperatively, the patient did well; follow-up imaging showed a non-dilated lower pole. The pathology of this structure was benign urothelium. Conclusions: Surgical management of aberrant ureteral duplications should focus on identifying known landmarks and should be considered to prevent symptomatic infections and renal scarring.",
keywords = "Congenital anomaly, Robotics, Ureteral duplication",
author = "A. Satyanarayan and D. Preuss and Davis, {T. D.} and Peters, {Craig A}",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jpurol.2018.11.018",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Pediatric Urology",
issn = "1477-5131",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Robotic excision and ureteroureterostomy of blind-ending ureteral ‘Duplication’

AU - Satyanarayan, A.

AU - Preuss, D.

AU - Davis, T. D.

AU - Peters, Craig A

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Introduction: Duplicated ureteral anatomy can be a reconstructive challenge. Blind-ending ureteral duplication has been reported with recommendations for surgical excision. Objective: This video reviews the importance of exposure of anatomic landmarks in surgical excision of a blind-ending ureteral duplication. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective case report of a patient who presented with a blind-ending ureteral duplication. Discussion: A 13-year-old female presented with a right-sided abdominal mass. Abdominal and pelvic imaging revealed a tubular structure adjacent to and below the right kidney, possibly connecting to the right lower pole. While initially observed, the patient re-presented with urosepsis. A retrograde pyelogram showed no connection between the right ureter and this structure. The patient underwent robotic-assisted excision of this structure. Intra-operatively, it was connected to the right lower pole calyces. A ureteroureterostomy to the orthotopic ureter was performed. Although the structure was adjacent to the bladder dome, there was no communication distally. Postoperatively, the patient did well; follow-up imaging showed a non-dilated lower pole. The pathology of this structure was benign urothelium. Conclusions: Surgical management of aberrant ureteral duplications should focus on identifying known landmarks and should be considered to prevent symptomatic infections and renal scarring.

AB - Introduction: Duplicated ureteral anatomy can be a reconstructive challenge. Blind-ending ureteral duplication has been reported with recommendations for surgical excision. Objective: This video reviews the importance of exposure of anatomic landmarks in surgical excision of a blind-ending ureteral duplication. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective case report of a patient who presented with a blind-ending ureteral duplication. Discussion: A 13-year-old female presented with a right-sided abdominal mass. Abdominal and pelvic imaging revealed a tubular structure adjacent to and below the right kidney, possibly connecting to the right lower pole. While initially observed, the patient re-presented with urosepsis. A retrograde pyelogram showed no connection between the right ureter and this structure. The patient underwent robotic-assisted excision of this structure. Intra-operatively, it was connected to the right lower pole calyces. A ureteroureterostomy to the orthotopic ureter was performed. Although the structure was adjacent to the bladder dome, there was no communication distally. Postoperatively, the patient did well; follow-up imaging showed a non-dilated lower pole. The pathology of this structure was benign urothelium. Conclusions: Surgical management of aberrant ureteral duplications should focus on identifying known landmarks and should be considered to prevent symptomatic infections and renal scarring.

KW - Congenital anomaly

KW - Robotics

KW - Ureteral duplication

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85058704797&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85058704797&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jpurol.2018.11.018

DO - 10.1016/j.jpurol.2018.11.018

M3 - Article

C2 - 30583906

AN - SCOPUS:85058704797

JO - Journal of Pediatric Urology

JF - Journal of Pediatric Urology

SN - 1477-5131

ER -