Robotic ileal ureter replacement vs kidney autotransplantation for long ureteric strictures
- PMID: 40066829
- DOI: 10.1111/bju.16704
Robotic ileal ureter replacement vs kidney autotransplantation for long ureteric strictures
Abstract
Objective: To compare functional and surgical outcomes of robot-assisted ileal ureter replacement (RAIUR) vs robot-assisted kidney autotransplantation (RAKAT).
Patients and methods: This was a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent RAIUR or RAKAT for long ureteric strictures at eight European tertiary centres (2017-2024). Primary endpoints were maintenance of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and postoperative complications within 30 days of surgery, described using the Clavien-Dindo classification. Secondary outcomes included infections, need for lifelong drainage, stricture persistence, and re-intervention for the stricture during follow-up.
Results: A total of 15 and 39 patients underwent RAIUR and RAKAT, respectively. The patients who underwent RAIUR were older (61 vs 45 years, P = 0.03), with more comorbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥3: 67% vs 28%, P = 0.03) and had a lower baseline eGFR (60 vs 87 mL/min/1.73m2, P = 0.007). The median stricture length was 9.6 cm for RAIUR vs 7 cm for RAKAT. Patients who underwent RAIUR had a shorter surgical time (290 vs 355 min, P = 0.008), whereas those who underwent RAKAT had a shorter hospitalisation (5 vs 8 days, P = 0.001). Overall complications were higher after RAIUR (73% vs 31%, P = 0.01), but Clavien-Dindo Grade ≥III complications were similar (13% vs 10%). During follow-up, both groups showed slightly improved renal function, low infection rates (13% for RAIUR vs 10% for RAKAT), low stricture persistence (13% for RAIUR vs 7.7% for RAKAT), and minimal need for drainage or re-intervention. The main limitation was the modest sample size.
Conclusion: In the first comparative analysis of RAIUR and RAKAT, we provide evidence that both techniques provide similar improvements in renal function and similar rates of postoperative high-grade complications. Both approaches represent definitive solutions for ureteric strictures in most patients. The choice of the technique should be based on patients' factors, patients' expectations and the surgeon's experience.
Keywords: ileal ureter replacement; kidney autotransplantation; robot‐assisted; ureteral reconstruction; ureteral strictures.
© 2025 BJU International.
References
-
- Serafetinidis E, Campos‐Juanatey F, Hallscheidt P et al. Summary paper of the updated 2023 European Association of Urology guidelines on urological trauma. Eur Urol Focus 2023; 10: 475–485
-
- Engel O, Rink M, Fisch M. Management of iatrogenic ureteral injury and techniques for ureteral reconstruction. Curr Opin Urol 2015; 25: 331–335
-
- Breda A, Diana P, Territo A et al. Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal robot‐assisted kidney autotransplantation: experience of the ERUS RAKT working group. Eur Urol 2022; 81: 168–175
-
- Zhao LC, Weinberg AC, Lee Z et al. Robotic ureteral reconstruction using buccal mucosa grafts: a multi‐institutional experience. Eur Urol 2018; 73: 419–426
-
- Yang K, Wang X, Xu C et al. Totally intracorporeal robot‐assisted unilateral or bilateral ileal ureter replacement for the treatment of ureteral strictures: technique and outcomes from a single center. Eur Urol 2023; 84: 561–570
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous