Surgical management of early and late ureteral complications after renal transplantation: Techniques and outcomes

Jens Berli, John R. Montgomery, Dorry L. Segev, Lloyd E. Ratner, Warren R. Maley, Matthew Cooper, Joseph K. Melancon, James Burdick, Niraj M. Desai, Nabil N. Dagher, Bonnie E. Lonze, Susanna M. Nazarian, Robert A. Montgomery

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: In this study, we present our experience with ureteral complications requiring revision surgery after renal transplantation and compare our results to a matched control population. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of our database between 1997 and 2012. We divided the cases into early (<60 d) and late repairs. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare graft survival between the intervention cohort and controls generated from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data set. Results: Of 2671 kidney transplantations, 51 patients were identified as to having undergone 53 ureteral revision procedures; 43.4% of cases were performed within 60 d of the transplant and were all associated with urinary leaks, and 49% demonstrated ureteral stenosis. Reflux allograft pyelonephritis and ureterolithiasis were each the indication for intervention in 3.8%; 15.1% of the lesions were located at the anastomotic site, 37.7% in the distal segment, 7.5% in the middle segment, 5.7% proximal ureter, and 15.1% had a long segmental stenosis. In 18.9%, the location was not specified. Techniques used included ureterocystostomy (30.2%), ureteroureterostomy (34%), ureteropyelostomy (30.1%), pyeloileostomy (1.9%), and ureteroileostomy (3.8%). No difference in overall graft survival (HR 1.24 95% CI 0.33-4.64, p = 0.7) was detected when compared to the matched control group. Conclusion: Using a variety of techniques designed to re-establish effective urinary flow, we have been able to salvage a high percentage of these allografts. When performed by an experienced team, a ureteric complication does not significantly impact graft survival or function as compared to a matched control group.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)26-33
Number of pages8
JournalClinical Transplantation
Volume29
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Graft Survival
Kidney Transplantation
Allografts
Ureterolithiasis
Pathologic Constriction
Research Design
Control Groups
Pyelonephritis
Ureter
Reoperation
Proportional Hazards Models
Registries
Databases
Transplants
Population

Keywords

  • Renal transplantation
  • Ureteral complications
  • Ureteral leak
  • Ureteral revision
  • Ureteral stenosis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Transplantation
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Berli, J., Montgomery, J. R., Segev, D. L., Ratner, L. E., Maley, W. R., Cooper, M., ... Montgomery, R. A. (2015). Surgical management of early and late ureteral complications after renal transplantation: Techniques and outcomes. Clinical Transplantation, 29(1), 26-33. https://doi.org/10.1111/ctr.12478

Surgical management of early and late ureteral complications after renal transplantation : Techniques and outcomes. / Berli, Jens; Montgomery, John R.; Segev, Dorry L.; Ratner, Lloyd E.; Maley, Warren R.; Cooper, Matthew; Melancon, Joseph K.; Burdick, James; Desai, Niraj M.; Dagher, Nabil N.; Lonze, Bonnie E.; Nazarian, Susanna M.; Montgomery, Robert A.

In: Clinical Transplantation, Vol. 29, No. 1, 01.01.2015, p. 26-33.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Berli, J, Montgomery, JR, Segev, DL, Ratner, LE, Maley, WR, Cooper, M, Melancon, JK, Burdick, J, Desai, NM, Dagher, NN, Lonze, BE, Nazarian, SM & Montgomery, RA 2015, 'Surgical management of early and late ureteral complications after renal transplantation: Techniques and outcomes', Clinical Transplantation, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 26-33. https://doi.org/10.1111/ctr.12478
Berli, Jens ; Montgomery, John R. ; Segev, Dorry L. ; Ratner, Lloyd E. ; Maley, Warren R. ; Cooper, Matthew ; Melancon, Joseph K. ; Burdick, James ; Desai, Niraj M. ; Dagher, Nabil N. ; Lonze, Bonnie E. ; Nazarian, Susanna M. ; Montgomery, Robert A. / Surgical management of early and late ureteral complications after renal transplantation : Techniques and outcomes. In: Clinical Transplantation. 2015 ; Vol. 29, No. 1. pp. 26-33.
@article{800355c78a1f4d96a72676d02aa6dd36,
title = "Surgical management of early and late ureteral complications after renal transplantation: Techniques and outcomes",
abstract = "Background: In this study, we present our experience with ureteral complications requiring revision surgery after renal transplantation and compare our results to a matched control population. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of our database between 1997 and 2012. We divided the cases into early (<60 d) and late repairs. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare graft survival between the intervention cohort and controls generated from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data set. Results: Of 2671 kidney transplantations, 51 patients were identified as to having undergone 53 ureteral revision procedures; 43.4{\%} of cases were performed within 60 d of the transplant and were all associated with urinary leaks, and 49{\%} demonstrated ureteral stenosis. Reflux allograft pyelonephritis and ureterolithiasis were each the indication for intervention in 3.8{\%}; 15.1{\%} of the lesions were located at the anastomotic site, 37.7{\%} in the distal segment, 7.5{\%} in the middle segment, 5.7{\%} proximal ureter, and 15.1{\%} had a long segmental stenosis. In 18.9{\%}, the location was not specified. Techniques used included ureterocystostomy (30.2{\%}), ureteroureterostomy (34{\%}), ureteropyelostomy (30.1{\%}), pyeloileostomy (1.9{\%}), and ureteroileostomy (3.8{\%}). No difference in overall graft survival (HR 1.24 95{\%} CI 0.33-4.64, p = 0.7) was detected when compared to the matched control group. Conclusion: Using a variety of techniques designed to re-establish effective urinary flow, we have been able to salvage a high percentage of these allografts. When performed by an experienced team, a ureteric complication does not significantly impact graft survival or function as compared to a matched control group.",
keywords = "Renal transplantation, Ureteral complications, Ureteral leak, Ureteral revision, Ureteral stenosis",
author = "Jens Berli and Montgomery, {John R.} and Segev, {Dorry L.} and Ratner, {Lloyd E.} and Maley, {Warren R.} and Matthew Cooper and Melancon, {Joseph K.} and James Burdick and Desai, {Niraj M.} and Dagher, {Nabil N.} and Lonze, {Bonnie E.} and Nazarian, {Susanna M.} and Montgomery, {Robert A.}",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/ctr.12478",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "29",
pages = "26--33",
journal = "Clinical Transplantation",
issn = "0902-0063",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Surgical management of early and late ureteral complications after renal transplantation

T2 - Techniques and outcomes

AU - Berli, Jens

AU - Montgomery, John R.

AU - Segev, Dorry L.

AU - Ratner, Lloyd E.

AU - Maley, Warren R.

AU - Cooper, Matthew

AU - Melancon, Joseph K.

AU - Burdick, James

AU - Desai, Niraj M.

AU - Dagher, Nabil N.

AU - Lonze, Bonnie E.

AU - Nazarian, Susanna M.

AU - Montgomery, Robert A.

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - Background: In this study, we present our experience with ureteral complications requiring revision surgery after renal transplantation and compare our results to a matched control population. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of our database between 1997 and 2012. We divided the cases into early (<60 d) and late repairs. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare graft survival between the intervention cohort and controls generated from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data set. Results: Of 2671 kidney transplantations, 51 patients were identified as to having undergone 53 ureteral revision procedures; 43.4% of cases were performed within 60 d of the transplant and were all associated with urinary leaks, and 49% demonstrated ureteral stenosis. Reflux allograft pyelonephritis and ureterolithiasis were each the indication for intervention in 3.8%; 15.1% of the lesions were located at the anastomotic site, 37.7% in the distal segment, 7.5% in the middle segment, 5.7% proximal ureter, and 15.1% had a long segmental stenosis. In 18.9%, the location was not specified. Techniques used included ureterocystostomy (30.2%), ureteroureterostomy (34%), ureteropyelostomy (30.1%), pyeloileostomy (1.9%), and ureteroileostomy (3.8%). No difference in overall graft survival (HR 1.24 95% CI 0.33-4.64, p = 0.7) was detected when compared to the matched control group. Conclusion: Using a variety of techniques designed to re-establish effective urinary flow, we have been able to salvage a high percentage of these allografts. When performed by an experienced team, a ureteric complication does not significantly impact graft survival or function as compared to a matched control group.

AB - Background: In this study, we present our experience with ureteral complications requiring revision surgery after renal transplantation and compare our results to a matched control population. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of our database between 1997 and 2012. We divided the cases into early (<60 d) and late repairs. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare graft survival between the intervention cohort and controls generated from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data set. Results: Of 2671 kidney transplantations, 51 patients were identified as to having undergone 53 ureteral revision procedures; 43.4% of cases were performed within 60 d of the transplant and were all associated with urinary leaks, and 49% demonstrated ureteral stenosis. Reflux allograft pyelonephritis and ureterolithiasis were each the indication for intervention in 3.8%; 15.1% of the lesions were located at the anastomotic site, 37.7% in the distal segment, 7.5% in the middle segment, 5.7% proximal ureter, and 15.1% had a long segmental stenosis. In 18.9%, the location was not specified. Techniques used included ureterocystostomy (30.2%), ureteroureterostomy (34%), ureteropyelostomy (30.1%), pyeloileostomy (1.9%), and ureteroileostomy (3.8%). No difference in overall graft survival (HR 1.24 95% CI 0.33-4.64, p = 0.7) was detected when compared to the matched control group. Conclusion: Using a variety of techniques designed to re-establish effective urinary flow, we have been able to salvage a high percentage of these allografts. When performed by an experienced team, a ureteric complication does not significantly impact graft survival or function as compared to a matched control group.

KW - Renal transplantation

KW - Ureteral complications

KW - Ureteral leak

KW - Ureteral revision

KW - Ureteral stenosis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84920937243&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84920937243&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/ctr.12478

DO - 10.1111/ctr.12478

M3 - Article

C2 - 25312804

AN - SCOPUS:84920937243

VL - 29

SP - 26

EP - 33

JO - Clinical Transplantation

JF - Clinical Transplantation

SN - 0902-0063

IS - 1

ER -