Minimally invasive ureteral reimplantation: trends in regions of the Russian Federation and The Republic of Belarus. Multi-center study

Introduction. Until recently, open ureteral reimplantation was considered the gold standard for the surgical treatment of ureterovesical junction (UVJ) pathologies. The introduction of minimally invasive ureteral reimplantation (MIUR) for the treatment of vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) and primary obstructive megaureter (POM) in children started in the 1990s. However, studies describing national trends in the use of minimally invasive and open approaches in the surgical treatment of UVJ pathology in children are limited.

Objective. To describe changes in the use of MIUR and open ureteral reimplantation (OUR) between 2007 and 2022 in some regions of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus and compare the results and complication rates of the two surgical approaches. 

Materials & methods. The study includes 1273 patients (1793 ureters), operated on for UVJ pathology in the period from 2007 to 2022. MIR was performed in 1356 (75.6%) ureters (913 for VUR and 443 for POM). The studied parameters included an annual amount of reimplantation, the age of patients, the frequency of intra- and postoperative complications, as well as the medium-term results of operations.

Results. The use of MIUR techniques has increased significantly over time, and in 2022, seventy-five percent of surgeries were performed using MIUR. Analysis of the rate of adoption of MIUR by clinics showed that those that began using it first experienced a significant increase in frequency of use after 4 to 6 years, while those that started later took 2 to 3 years to achieve a significant positive trend. There were 5 (0.4%) intraoperative complications in the MIUR group. All these complications were classified as grade I according to the Satava grading system. There was no significant difference between MIUR and OUR in terms of postoperative complication rates (6.6% vs. 7.6%, p = 0.8). The efficiency of reimplantation was 96.6% in the MIUR group compared to 95.9% in the OUR group for POM and 96.2% in the MIR group compared to 94.6% in the OUR for VUR.

Conclusion. In the regions of Russia involved in the study, there has been a trend towards completely replacing open surgery with minimally invasive techniques. Regarding complication rates and efficacy, MIUR is not significantly different from OUR.

1. Tejwani R, Young BJ, Wang HS, Wolf S, Purves JT, Wiener JS, Routh JC. Open versus minimally invasive surgical approaches in pediatric urology: Trends in utilization and complications. J Pediatr Urol. 2017;13(3):283.e1-283.e9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2017.01.013

2. Bowen DK, Faasse MA, Liu DB, Gong EM, Lindgren BW, Johnson EK. Use of Pediatric Open, Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Ureteral Reimplantation in the United States: 2000 to 2012. J Urol. 2016;196(1):207-212. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.065

3. Satava RM. Identification and reduction of surgical error using simulation. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2005;14(4):257-261. DOI: 10.1080/13645700500274112

4. Ehrlich RM, Gershman A, Fuchs G. Laparoscopic vesicoureteroplasty in children: initial case reports. Urology. 1994;43(2):255-261. DOI: 10.1016/0090-4295(94)90058-2

5. Yeung CK, Sihoe JD, Borzi PA. Endoscopic cross-trigonal ureteral reimplantation under carbon dioxide bladder insufflation: a novel technique. J Endourol. 2005;19(3):295-299. DOI: 10.1089/end.2005.19.295

6. Ansari MS, Mandhani A, Khurana N, Kumar A. Laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation with extracorporeal tailoring for megaureter: a simple technical nuance. J Urol. 2006;176(6 Pt 1):2640-2622. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.08.025

7. Kutikov A, Guzzo TJ, Canter DJ, Casale P. Initial experience with laparoscopic transvesical ureteral reimplantation at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. J Urol. 2006;176(5):2222-2225; discussion 2225-2226. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.07.082

8. Peters CA. Robotically assisted surgery in pediatric urology. Urol Clin North Am. 2004;31(4):743-752. DOI: 10.1016/j.ucl.2004.06.007

9. Bondarenko S. Laparoscopic extravesical transverse ureteral reimplantation in children with obstructive megaureter. J Pediatr Urol. 2013;9(4):437-441. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2013.01.001

10. Pirogov A.V., Sizonov V.V., Kogan M.I. Experience of 157 vesikoscopic operations in children. Urologiia. 2017;(6):59-64. (In Russian). PMID: 29376597

11. Pirogov A.V., Sizonov V.V. Comparative analysis of efficacy of ureteral reimplantation at vesicoureteral reflux and ureterovesical junction obstruction using vesicoscopic approach in children. Urology Herald. 2017;5(4):47-57. (In Russian). DOI: 10.21886/2308-6424-2017-5-4-47-57

12. Dubrov V.I., Kagantsov I.M. Intravesical and extravesical ureteral reimplantation in children with bilateral refluxing megaureter: comparison of results. Urology Herald. 2020;8(2):21-28. (In Russian). DOI: 10.21886/2308-6424-2020-8-2-21-28

13. Dubrov V.I., Bondarenko S.G., Kagantsov I.M. Modified single-sided laparoscopic extravesical antireflux operation. Russian Journal of Pediatric Surgery, Anesthesia and Intensive Care. 2018;8(2):24-32. (In Russian). DOI: 10.30946/2219-4061-2018-8-2-24-32

14. Wang J, Mou Y, Li A. Comparison of Open and Pneumovesical Cohen Approach for Treatment of Primary Vesicoureteral Junction Obstruction in Children. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2020;30(3):328-333. DOI: 10.1089/lap.2018.0791

15. Esposito C, Escolino M, Lopez M, Farina A, Cerulo M, Savanelli A, La Manna A, Caprio MG, Settimi A, Varlet F. Surgical Management of Pediatric Vesicoureteral Reflux: A Comparative Study Between Endoscopic, Laparoscopic, and Open Surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2016;26(7):574-580. DOI: 10.1089/lap.2016.0055

16. Fernández-Alcaráz D, Robles-Torres JI, García-Hernández C, Guillén-Lozoya AH, Landa-Juárez S. Laparoscopic vs Open Extravesical Ureteral Reimplantation in Pediatric Population: A Single-Center Experience. Urol J. 2022;19(6):427-432. DOI: 10.22037/uj.v19i.7217

17. Lopez M, Gander R, Royo G, Varlet F, Asensio M. Laparoscopic-Assisted Extravesical Ureteral Reimplantation and Extracorporeal Ureteral Tapering Repair for Primary Obstructive Megaureter in Children. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2017;27(8):851-857. DOI: 10.1089/lap.2016.0456

18. Dubrov V, Shmyrov O, Kagantsov I, Bondarenko S. Laparoscopic extravesical transverse ureteral reimplantation for megaureter in children: results from a multi-institutional study. J Ped Endosc Surg. 2020;2:21–27. DOI: 10.1007/s42804-019-00034-9

19. Rappaport YH, Kord E, Noh PH, Koucherov S, Gaber J, Shumaker A, Zisman A, Stav K, Chertin B, Dubrov V, Bondarenko S, Neheman A. Minimally Invasive Dismembered Extravesical Cross-Trigonal Ureteral Reimplantation for Obstructed Megaureter: A Multi-Institutional Study Comparing Robotic and Laparoscopic Approaches. Urology. 2021;149:211-215. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2020.10.018

20. Garcia-Roig M, Travers C, McCracken CE, Kirsch AJ. National Trends in the Management of Primary Vesicoureteral Reflux in Children. J Urol. 2018;199(1):287-293. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.09.073