Landa-Juárez S, Miguel-Gómez RD, Hernández-Aguilar G, Ruiz-Castro NM

Language: Spanish
References: 14
Page: 29-33
PDF size: 98.91 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: The increase bladder has proven to be, in selected cases, a procedure safe and effective for the treatment of the pathology that reduces the adaptability (compliance) and bladder capacity. The first enterocistoplastía increase laparoscopic was carried out in 1995, Since then there are few series published with this approach and there are no reports in the literature of collisions laparoscopic for ureterocistoplastía. We describe a surgical technique laparoscopic original for ureterocistoplastía.
Presentation of Clinical Case: female patient of 11 years of age with background of myelomeningocele, neurogenic bladder secondary, and vesicoureteral reflux grade IV with exclusion left kidney. Key Steps of the surgical technique: Collision of the retroperitoneum, vascular control and dissection of the kidney excluded for nephrectomy ipsilateral, preserving the ureter dilated. Desperitonización dome bladder, detubularización of ureteral flap in the lower third and means to anastomosarlo detrusor. Placement of upper third ureteral through the tunnel submucosal for the creation of the mechanism Mitrofanoff through a port umbilical.
Discussion: The first report of enterocistoplastía laparoscopic was published by Docimo in 1995, making an increase with stomach. There are no however reports of collisions for laparoscopic ureterocistoplastía. We describe a technical original in patients selected for the realization of the cistoplastía with distal ureter through collision laparoscopic supplemented with creation of mechanism Mitrofanoff with the ureter proximal. The monitoring post surgery has tested a therapeutic impact beneficial, comparable to the obtained with the technical open, both in the adaptability (compliance) and bladder capacity of the patient, with the benefit of the minimum invasion.

REFERENCES

1. Duel BP, Gonzalez R, Spencer J. Alternative tecniques for augmentation cystoplasty. J. Urol. 159, 3: 998-1005, 1998.

2. Docimo SG, Moore RG, Adams J, et al: Laparoscopic bladder augmentation using stomach. Urology 46: 565-569, 1995.

3. Gill IS, Rackley RR, Meraney AM, et al: Laparoscopic enterocystoplasty. Urology 55: 178– 181, 2000.

4. Elliott SP, Meng MV, Anwar HP, et al: Complete laparoscopic ileal cystoplasty. Urology 59: 939–943, 2002.

5. Chung SY, Meldrum K, and Docimo SG: Laparoscopic assisted reconstructive surgery: a 7-year experience. J Urol. 171: 372–375, 2004.

6. Bellinger MF: Ureterocystoplasty; a unique method for vesical augmentation in children. J Urol. 149: 811, 1993.

7. Churchill BM, Aliabadi H, Landau EH, McLorie GA, Steckler RE, Mckenna PH, et al: Ureteral bladder augmentation. J. Urol, 150: 776, 1993.

8. Lorenzo AJ, Cerveira J, and Farhat WA: Pediatric laparoscopic ileal cystoplasty: Complete intracorporeal technique. Urology 69: 977-981, 2007.

9. Hussmann DA, SnodGrass WT et al. Ureterocystoplasty: Indications for a successful augmentation. J Urol. 171, 376- 380, 2004.

10. Tekgül S, Öge O, Bal K, et al: Ureterocystoplasty: An alternative reconstructive procedure to enterocystoplasty in suitable cases. J Pediatr Surg 35, 4, 577-579, 2000.

11. Gozalbez R. Jr, Kim C.O Jr: Ureterocystoplasty with preservation of ipsilateral renal function. J Pediatr Surg. 31, 7, 970-975, 1996.

12. Pascual L.A, Sentagne L.M, Vega-Perugorría F.I, et al: Single distal ureter for Ureterocystoplasty: A safe first Choice tissue for bladder augmentation. J Urol. 165, 6, 1 2256 – 2258, 2001.

13. Adams, M.C, Brock III J.C, Pope IV J.C, Rink R.C: Ureterocystoplasty: Is it necessary to detubularize the distal ureter? J. Urol. 160, 3, 1: 851-853, 1998.

14. Wolf, J. S. and Turzan, C. W.: Augmentation ureterocystoplasty. J Urol., 149: 1095, 1993