Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2013 Dec;31(6):1441-4.
doi: 10.1007/s00345-012-1019-6. Epub 2013 Jan 5.

Unfavorable outcomes of laparoscopic pyeloplasty using barbed sutures: a multi-center experience

Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Unfavorable outcomes of laparoscopic pyeloplasty using barbed sutures: a multi-center experience

Evangelos Liatsikos et al. World J Urol. 2013 Dec.

Abstract

Purpose: Barbed self-retaining sutures (SRS) have been introduced as an advance in suture technology, facilitating reconstructive laparoscopic surgery. We present the experience of three centers performing laparoscopic pyeloplasty with the use of SRS.

Methods: Preoperative, intraoperative and follow-up data were collected for 6 patients undergoing pyeloplasty using the Quill SRS (Angiotech, Vancouver, CAN) in three centers. Standard laparoscopic pyeloplasty technique was used and a knot-less continuous anastomosis between the spatulated ureter and the renal pelvis was created.

Results: Knot-less uretero-pelvic anastomosis creation was feasible in all six cases. Peri-operative data were similar to standard pyeloplasty using conventional suture materials. A very high stricture recurrence rate (5/6 patients) was noted during follow-up. Further endourologic and open interventions were needed to address the recurrence of the strictures.

Conclusions: Knotless intracorporeal laparoscopic suturing using SRS for the reconstruction of UPJ during laparoscopic pyeloplasty is associated with high rates of stricture recurrence at least in the initial cases of each surgeon. Until further investigations elucidate the cause of treatment failure, SRS should not be recommended for upper urinary tract reconstruction.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Urology. 2011 Sep;78(3):572-9 - PubMed
    1. Eur Urol. 2012 Apr;61(4):783-95 - PubMed
    1. Int Braz J Urol. 2012 Jan-Feb;38(1):89-96 - PubMed
    1. Urology. 2006 Jun;67(6):1133-7 - PubMed
    1. J Endourol. 2010 Nov;24(11):1789-93 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources