Urology
Volume 61, Issue 6 , Pages 1107-1111 , June 2003

Impact of hydronephrosis and renal function on treatment outcome: antegrade versus retrograde endopyelotomy

  • John S Lam

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York, USA
    • ,
  • Kimberly L Cooper

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York, USA
    • ,
  • Tricia D Greene

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York, USA
    • ,
  • Mantu Gupta

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Mantu Gupta, M.D., Department of Urology, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, 161 Fort Washington Avenue, Irving Pavilion, 11th Floor, New York, NY 10032, USA

Received 4 October 2002 ,Accepted 9 January 2003.

References 

  1. Karlin GS, Badlani GH, Smith AD. Endopyelotomy versus open pyeloplasty (comparison in 88 patients). J Urol. 1988;140:476–478
  2. Brooks JD, Kavoussi LR, Preminger GM, et al.  Comparison of open and endourologic approaches to the obstructed ureteropelvic junction. Urology. 1995;46:791–795
  3. Gerber GS, Kim JC. Ureteroscopy endopyelotomy in the treatment of patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Urology. 2000;55:198–203
  4. Davis DM. Intubated ureterotomy (a new operation for ureteral and ureteropelvic stricture). Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1943;76:513–523
  5. Wickham JEA, Kellet MJ. Percutaneous pyelolysis. Eur Urol. 1983;9:122–124
  6. Perez LM, Friedman RM, Carson CC. Endoureteropyelotomy in adults. Urology. 1992;39:71–76
  7. Kuendel M, Karth K. Endopyelotomy (long term follow-up of 143 patients). J Endourol. 1990;4:109–115
  8. Van Cangh PJ, Wilmart JF, Opsomer RJ, et al.  Long term results and later recurrence after endoureteropyelotomy (a critical analysis of prognostic factors). J Urol. 1994;151:934–937
  9. Motola JA, Badlani GH, Smith AD. Results of 212 consecutive endopyelotomies (an 8 year follow-up). J Urol. 1993;149:453–456
  10. Shalhav AL, Giusti G, Elbahnasy AM, et al.  Adult endopyelotomy (impact of etiology and antegrade versus retrograde approach on outcome). J Urol. 1998;160:685–689
  11. Chow GK, Geisinger MA, Streem SB. Endopyelotomy outcome as a function of high versus dependent ureteral insertion. Urology. 1999;54:999–1002
  12. Van Cangh PJ, Jonon JL, Wese FX, et al.  Endoureteropyelotomy (percutaneous treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction). J Urol. 1989;141:1317–1322
  13. Karlin G, Badlani G, Smith AD. Percutaneous pyeloplasty for congenital ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Urology. 1992;39:533–537
  14. Meretyk I, Meretyk S, Clayman RV. Endopyelotomy (comparison of ureteroscopic retrograde and antegrade percutaneous techniques). J Urol. 1992;148:775–783
  15. Gupta M, Tuncay OL, Smith AD. Open surgical exploration after failed endopyelotomy (a 12-year perspective). J Urol. 1997;157:1613–1619
  16. Inglis JA, Tolley DA. Ureteroscopic pyelolysis for pelviureteric junction obstruction. Br J Urol. 1986;58:250–252
  17. Preminger GM, Clayman RV, Nakada SY, et al.  A multicenter clinical trial investigating the use of a fluoroscopically controlled cutting balloon catheter for the management of ureteral and ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J Urol. 1997;157:1625–1629
  18. Nadler RB, Rao GS, Pearle MS, et al.  Acucise endopyelotomy (assessment of long-term durability). J Urol. 1996;156:1094–1097
  19. Faerber GJ, Richardson TD, Farah N, et al.  Retrograde treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction using the ureteral cutting balloon catheter. J Urol. 1997;157:454–458
  20. Nakada SY, Wolf JS, Brink JA, et al.  Retrospective analysis of the effect of crossing vessels on successful retrograde endopyelotomy outcomes using spiral computerized tomography angiography. J Urol. 1998;159:62–65
  21. Sampaio FJ. Vascular anatomy at the ureteropelvic junction. Urol Clin North Am. 1998;25:251–258
  22. Badlani G, Eshghi M, Smith AD. Percutaneous surgery for ureteropelvic junction obstruction (endopyelotomy) (technique and early results). J Urol. 1986;135:26–28
  23. Gupta M, Smith AD. Crossing vessels at the ureteropelvic junction (do they influence endopyelotomy outcome?). J Endourol. 1996;10:183–187
  24. Kapoor R, Zaman W, Kumar A, et al.  Endopyelotomy in poorly functioning kidney (is it worthwhile?). J Endourol. 2001;15:725–728
  25. Danuser H, Hochreiter WW, Ackermann DK, et al.  Influence of stent size on the success of antegrade endopyelotomy for primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (results of 2 consecutive series). J Urol. 2001;166:902–909
  26. Jabbour ME, Goldfischer ER, Anderson AE, et al.  Endopyelotomy failure is associated with reduced transforming growth factor-beta. J Urol. 1998;160:1991–1994
  27. Jabbour ME, Goldfischer ER, Klima WJ, et al.  Endopyelotomy after failed pyeloplasty (the long-term results). J Urol. 1998;160:690–693
  28. Kletscher BA, Segura JW, LeRoy AJ, et al.  Percutaneous antegrade endopyelotomy (review of 50 consecutive cases). J Urol. 1995;153:701–703
  29. Malden ES, Picus D, Clayman RV. Arteriovenous fistula complicating endopyelotomy. J Urol. 1992;148:1520–1523
  30. Schwartz BF, Stoller ML. Complications of retrograde balloon cautery endopyelotomy. J Urol. 1999;162:1594–1598

PII: S0090-4295(03)00231-0

doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(03)00231-0

Urology
Volume 61, Issue 6 , Pages 1107-1111 , June 2003

Article Tools