European
Urology
European Urology 46 (2004) 598–603
Antireflux Uretero-Intestinal AnastomosisFlap-and-Trough
TechniqueApplicable to Ileum: Early Clinical Experience
Jan Doležela,*, Martin Sutorýa, Pavel Navrátilb
a
Institution of Traumatology, Brno, Masaryk University School of Medicine, Brno, Czech Republic
Section of Kidney Transplantation, Department of Urology, Charles University, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic
b
Accepted 25 June 2004
Available online 23 July 2004
Abstract
Objective: To report our functional results of the ‘‘flap-and-trough’’ (FT) antireflux uretero-intestinal anastomosis
(UIA) applied to various forms of urinary diversions.
Patients and methods: From April 1998 through March 2003, a total of 49 ureters were implanted in 28 patients into
various types of urinary diversions. Forty-six ureters were implanted transluminally (32 separately, 14 conjointly by
the double-barrelled method), 3 ureters extraluminally into preformed reservoirs during kidney transplantation.
Forty-one ureters were implanted primarily, 8 ureters secondarily due to stricture of former UIA.
Results: Median observation time was 26 months. The healing was uneventful in all cases. Late complications
were not related to the UIA. Twenty-four patients could be evaluated. The upper urinary tract remained stable, no
reflux and no stenosis at the site of UIA were detected. FT anastomoses were clearly seen and easily accessible at
endoscopy.
Conclusion: In our hands the FT anastomosis has proved to be simple, safe and highly effective in terms of
protecting the upper urinary tract against obstruction and reflux. Creation of antireflux UIA need not mean increased
risk of obstruction in comparison with direct (reflux) ones. The FT technique could represent another alternative of
nonrefluxing implantation of normal as well as dilated ureters into various types of urinary diversion.
# 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Urinary diversion; Uretero-intestinal anastomosis; Kidney transplantation
1. Introduction
The need for construction of antireflux UIA in
urinary diversion is controversial [1–8]: It is not exactly
known how and when reflux can be harmful to the
kidneys, but it is absolutely clear, that untreated
obstruction at the site of UIA inevitably leads to renal
damage [8]. Questioning the necessity of antireflux UIA
is based on the presumption that all antireflux techniques are associated with a higher risk of stenosis in
comparison with direct elliptical refluxing UIA [8]. But
there are urological surgeons who advocate the use of
antireflux UIA in high-pressure urinary diversions [8] or
* Corresponding author. Tel. +420 545 538 655; Fax: +420 545 211 082.
E-mail address: j.dolezel@unbr.cz, dolezelj@seznam.cz (J. Doležel).
simply whenever possible for better kidney protection
against reflux of often infected urine [1–3]. For them
modern urology offers several safe and highly effective
antireflux techniques [9,10]. The FT technique [11]
seems to share these attributes as well.
2. Patients and methods
Between April 1998 and March 2003 in 28 patients (9 females
and 19 males) whose mean age was 56 years (range 24–78) a total
of 49 ureters were antirefluxively implanted into various types of
intestinal diversions using the original [11] or modified FT technique. The indications for diversion were as follows: bladder cancer
(n = 17), shrunken bladder (n = 7), posterior urethral valve (n = 2),
exstrophy-epispadias complex (n = 1) and neuropathic bladder
(n = 1). Twenty-two patients underwent simultaneous cystectomy.
0302-2838/$ – see front matter # 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2004.06.018
J. Doležel et al. / European Urology 46 (2004) 598–603
Fig. 1. Original technique: (a) The trough in the intestinal mucosa of the
reservoir wall. The width of the trough equals the outer diameter of the
ureter, the length is four to five times longer. The wide hiatus is created at the
base of the trough. (b) The ureter is drawn freely through the hiatus into the
lumen of the reservoir. (c) The ureter is spatulated at an avascular plane to
the extent of the length of the trough. (d) The spatulated part of the ureter is
retracted proximally as a flap covering the intramural part of the ureter. (e)
The ureter is anchored at the site of the top of the spatulation to the distal end
of the trough by a pair of sutures. The top of the flap is fixed at the site of the
hiatus by another pair of anchoring sutures. The burying of the ureter is
finished by stitching both sides of the flap to the mucosal sides of the through
by continuous sutures.
Forty-six ureters were implanted transluminally: 32 separately by
the original method (Fig. 1) [11], mostly into low-pressure
reservoirs (n = 19). The ileal orthotopic neobladders were constructed from 40 cm long segments of the detubularized preterminal ileum arranged in ‘‘W’’- or ‘‘M’’-shaped configuration.
Fourteen ureters were implanted conjointly by the double-barrelled method into ileal (n = 6) or transverse colon (n = 1) conduits
(Figs. 2 and 3). Three ureters, in two men and one woman, were
implanted extraluminally to preformed low-pressure orthotopic
599
Fig. 2. Double-barrelled technique: (a) The oral end of an intestinal
conduit is split antimesenterially to the extent of 3–4 cm. The trough
in the intestinal mucosa is created at the mesenterial border, beginning at
the end of the conduit; the width of the trough equals the outer diameters
of both the ureters and its length is four to five times longer. The ends of
both the ureter are spatulated proportionally to the length of the trough.
The spatulated ends are sutured together by a continuous suture and (b)
retracted proximally as a flap covering the intra-intestinal part of the
ureters. (c) The ureters are laid down into the trough, anchored there and
the flap sutured to the mucosal sides of the trough like in the original FT
technique. (d) The end of the conduit is closed by a longitudinal single
layer continuous suture.
reservoirs during kidney transplantation (Fig. 4). The specific
number of ureteral implantations performed into each type of
diversion is shown in Table 1. Forty-one ureters were implanted
primarily and 8 ureters secondarily due to stricture at the site of a
former UIA. The ureters were stented for 10 days. The original
technique [11] was slightly modified: the burying of ureters was
completed by suturing both sides of the ureteral flap to the
mucosal sides of the trough using continuous suture (i.e. not
single ones as originally) between proximal and distal anchoring
sutures (Fig. 5).
After hospital discharge the patients were closely followed
up by laboratory tests, ultrasonography, radionuclide and
X-ray imaging, and by endoscopy when needed. A retrograde
enterocystography/loopography was taken to examine reflux 3
weeks after the procedure, and again at 6 and 12 months, and
thereafter when indicated: The reservoirs/conduits were gravityfilled (80–100 cm and 120 cm water column for reservoirs
and conduits respectively) with contrast medium via a catheter
600
J. Doležel et al. / European Urology 46 (2004) 598–603
Fig. 3. The intraoperative appearance of the finished double-barrelled
anastomosis at the opened end of the ileal conduit. Ureters are stented.
under simultaneous fluoroscopic control with the patient in a
supine position. Finally the contrast medium was emptied/voided
under fluoroscopic control after moving patient to an upright
position. When reflux was present delayed images were obtained
to assess the upper tract drainage. Ultrasonography of the upper
urinary tract was carried out monthly for the first 6 months and
3-monthly thereafter, IVU and 99mTc-MAG3 radionuclide studies
annually. Results were evaluated after minimum follow-up of 12
months.
Fig. 4. Extraluminal technique: (a) The wall of the neobladder is opened
for 2.5 to 3 cm in the same direction (towards bladder neck) as the axis of
intended uretero-intestinal anastomosis. The mucosal trough begins at the
distal commissure of the opening. The ureter is spatulated to the proper
extent. (b) The ureter, with the retracted spatulated part, is laid into the
trough and fixed there in the same manner as in the original method. It is
possible to place and tie the anchoring sutures from outside the neobladder. (c) The neobladder wall is closed with care to avoid strangulation
of the ureter.
Table 1
Number of the FT ureteral implantations into each type of urinary diversion
Type of diversion
No. of patients
No. of ureters/type of UIA
Ileal neobladder
13
23/single: 22 translum.
1 extralum.
2/single
4/single
2/extralum.
2/single
14/2 single,
6 double-barrelled
2/double-barrelled
Cutaneous ileal reservoir
Cutaneous cecoileal reservoir (Indiana)
Augmentation ileocystoplasty
Ileal anal pouch
Ileal conduit
1
2
2
1
8
Transverse colon conduit
1
Total
UIA = uretero-intestinal anastomosis.
28
49 ureters
Comment
Renal transplant pt.
Secondary impl.
Renal transplant pts.
Secondary impl.
Secondary impl.
601
J. Doležel et al. / European Urology 46 (2004) 598–603
Fig. 5. The intraoperative appearance of the finished single FT anastomosis:
The flap is fixed to the intestinal mucosa by the running sutures between the
pairs of proximal and distal anchoring sutures.
3. Results
The healing of the anastomoses was uneventful in all
cases; no leakage has occurred.
Four of 28 patients (7 of 49 reno-ureteral units)
were excluded from the study because of short
follow-up: A 39-year-old patient with exstrophy-epispadias complex died of extensive myocardial infarction in the first month after surgery. A 43-year old
woman, with a cutaneous W-shaped ileal reservoir,
developed a volvulus around the mesentery of the
reservoir at the third week. The reservoir was removed
and the ileal conduit with refluxing UIA was performed during surgical revision. Two patients died
of cancer dissemination 3 and 7 months postoperatively.
Results of followed-up patients related to the type of
diversion and modification of UIA are specified in
Table 2. Median follow-up was 26 months (range
13–72). In all but one female patient, the upper urinary
tract remained stable: i.e. the progression of upper
urinary tract deterioration by obstruction or reflux
was not detected by the aforementioned imaging studies and laboratory tests. The woman, with ileal neobladder, developed recurrent (31 years after
pyelolithotomy and 3 years after ESWL) bilateral
staghorn struvite nephrolithiasis with moderate hydronephrosis three years after the procedure. She successfully passed all stone fragments after ESWL on the
right side and is scheduled for PCNL on the left side.
One patient with an ileal neobladder died of cancer at
13 month and one is dying of cancer 26 months after
cystectomy. All the surviving men with ileal orthotopic
reservoirs (n = 7) void spontaneously via the urethra
and are continent by day (obviating pads). Three of
them are also continent at night, three use pads for
safety and one uses a condom urinal at night. One
patient passed a 10 mm stone (100% apatite) from the
neobladder 2 years after surgery. Of four women with
orthotopic reservoirs (followed up for more than 24
months) only one voids spontaneously without residuum, two follow a regime of full self-catheterization,
and one voids with about 100 ml residuum catheterizing twice a day [12]. They are fully continent by day
and night. In one, the m. rectus fascial sling urethral
suspension was performed because of intrinsic sphincter deficiency incontinence. FT anastomoses were
clearly seen, remained patent and of stable length at
endoscopy or during one open revision for additional
ileal patching of the reservoir. Enterocystography/
loopography confirmed reflux in 3 of 49 reno-ureteral
units (6%): In one woman the bilateral grade II reflux
[13] was detected on the 3-week enterocystogram, but
not subsequently. It was the woman who voided with
residuum and developed recurrent nephrolithiasis. In
one man with the ileal conduit the grade III reflux to the
right (preoperatively dilated) ureter was seen on the
3-week loopography, but not two years later. One
Table 2
Results related to specific type of performed diversion and modification of anastomosis after median follow up of 26 months (range 13–72)
Type of diversion
No. of ureters/type of UIA
No. of refluxing anastomoses
No. of stenotic anastomoses
Ileal neobladder
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Transverse colon conduit
21/single: 20 translum.
1 extralum.
4/single
2/extralum.
13/1 single,
6 double-barrelled
2/double-barrelled
0
0
Total
42
0
0
Cutaneous cecoileal reservoir (Indiana)
Augmentation ileocystoplasty
Ileal conduit
UIA = uretero-intestinal anastomosis.
602
J. Doležel et al. / European Urology 46 (2004) 598–603
Table 3
Complications of currently used uretero-ileal anastomoses/uretero-reservoir
junctions
Type of UIA/junction
Complications (%)
Dehiscence
Stenosis
Reflux
Refluxing
Nesbit [7,25,26]
Wallace [27]
4
6
3–8a
4
+
+
Nonrefluxing
Split-cuff nipple [25,28]
Le Duc [29,30]
ATIS + ileal neobladder [7]
SLET [9,31]
T-pouch valve [32]
FT [present study]
0
0
ns
ns
?
0
3–8
2–29
3
4–5
?
0
2–17
3–15
0b
3
?
6c
UIA = uretero-intestinal anastomosis; ATIS = afferent tubular isoperistaltic
(ileal) segment; SLET = serous-lined extramural tunnel.
a
Probably depends on presence/absence of chronic infection.
b
No reflux during physiologic filling of the neobladder and voiding by
the pelvic floor relaxation and abdominal straining; reflux during retrograde
cystography.
c
Detected only on the 3-week retrograde cystography not thereafter.
woman with the ileal neobladder (on self-catheterization) suffered an episode of acute pyelonephritis 11
months after surgery. Reflux was never detected in this
patient. Chronic bacteriuria occurred in all but 7 male
patients with ileal neobladders.
4. Discussion
The necessity to construct the antireflux UIA in
urinary diversion is controversial [1–8]. The main
arguments against antireflux implantation are based
on hypotheses that antireflux techniques generally have
higher inherent potential for stenotization in comparison with direct elliptical techniques and that reflux
prevention is less important for protection of renal
function than keeping upper urinary tract unobstructed
[4,6,8]. Complication rates of currently used UIA/
uretero-reservoir junctions published in literature are
summarized in Table 3. Most of strictures at the site of
the tunneled antireflux UIA develop within 1 or 2 years
postoperatively [14]. There are several animal as well
as human studies supporting beneficial effect of the
antireflux UIA on kidney preservation [15–18]. Several
safe and highly effective methods were developed
recently [2,10]. The FT technique [11] might represent
another improved antireflux flap valve method, which
is highly resistant to obstruction. The potential advantages of this method could be summarized as follows:
Perfect and immediate covering of an adventitia of the
intramural ureter with physiologically ‘‘urine resistant’’ tissue ensures good prevention of scarring (contrary to the Le Duc technique [19]) [20,21]. Stable
length of tunneled ureter secured by two pairs of
anchoring sutures ensures good reflux prevention.
The ureteral meatus does not comprise complete circumferential suture line. This might reduce development of meatal stenosis. Contrary to the serous-lined
extramural tunnel [9], the integrity of the FT tunnel is
not dependent on stability of dorsal suture line and thus
it cannot open [1]. The FT anastomosis is clearly
visible at endoscopy (contrary to Goodwin/Leadbetter
methods [22,23]). It is possible to lay the ureter in any
direction in relation to a bowel axis: the axis of the
ureter could always be oriented to the neobladder neck.
This facilitates traversal of the anastomosis by endoscopic instruments. The method allows the implantation of ureters of normal as well as large diameters. The
method is simple and easy to learn. The authors intend
to perform it laparoscopically.
Theoretically, the main potential disadvantage of
the FT technique could be longer juxtaposition
between transitional and enteric epithelium in comparison with standard methods. Although the relationship between the length of the uro-enteric border and
the risk of cancer has not been proved, this fact might
increase the incidence of carcinogenesis [24]. For this
possibility the method was not applied for diversions
in which the UIA is in a direct contact with the fecal
stream.
Construction of the FT anastomosis has a somewhat
higher demand upon ureteral length. In spite of this
fact, the method has been used for secondary UIA in
the pelvis.
5. Conclusions
Creation of the antireflux UIA need not mean the
increased risk of obstruction in comparison with
direct elliptical (reflux) ones. Randomized prospective studies are needed to solve this controversy. For
surgeons who believe that the antireflux UIA is one of
prerequisites for creation of a safe urinary diversion,
the FT technique could represent another alternative
for implanting normal, as well as dilated, ureters
into various types of urinary diversions. The FT
technique has become a method of choice in our
departments.
Acknowledgement
Mr. Paul Veater corrected the English text.
J. Doležel et al. / European Urology 46 (2004) 598–603
603
References
[1] Månsson W. Comment. In: Hohenfellner R, Novick A, Fichtner J,
editors. Innovations in Urologic Surgery. 2nd ed. Oxford: Isis Medical
Media; 1997. p. 622–3.
[2] Abol-Enein H, Ghoneim MA. Functional results of orthotopic ileal
neobladder with serous-lined extramural ureteral reimplantation:
experience with 450 patients. J Urol 2001;165:1427–32.
[3] Kristjánsson A, Månsson W. Refluxing or nonrefluxing ureteric anastomosis. BJU Int 1999;84:905–10.
[4] Hohenfellner R, Black P, Leissner J, Allhoff EP. Refluxing ureterointestinal anastomosis for continent cutaneous urinary diversion. J
Urol 2002;168:1013–7.
[5] Ghoneim MA Editorial Comment. In: Hohenfellner R, Black P,
Leissner J, Allhoff EP, editors. Refluxing ureterointestinal anastomosis
for continent cutaneous urinary diversion. J Urol. 2002;168:1013–7.
[6] Studer JE, Spiegel T, Casanova GA, Springer J, Gerber E, Ackerman
DK, et al. Ileal bladder substitue: antireflux nipple or afferent tubular
segment? Eur Urol 1991;20:315–26.
[7] Thoeny HC, Sonnenschein MJ, Madersbacher S, Vock P, Studer UE. Is
ileal orthotopic bladder substitution with an afferent tubular segment
detrimental to the upper urinary tract in the long term? J Urol
2002;168:2030–4.
[8] Studer UE, Turner WH. Is reflux prevention important in urinary
diversion? In: Webster GD, Goldwasser B, editors. Urinary Diversion:
Scientific Foundations and Clinical Practice. Oxford: Isis Medical
Media; 1995. p. 282–93.
[9] Abol-Enein H, Ghoneim MA. A novel uretero-ileal reimplantation
technique: the serous lined extramural tunnel. A preliminary report. J
Urol 1994;151:1193–7.
[10] Stein JP, Lieskovsky G, Ginsberg DA, Bochner BH, Skinner DG. The
T pouch: an orthotopic ileal neobladder incorporating a serosal lined
ileal antireflux technique. J Urol 1998;159:1836–42.
[11] Doležel J. Uretero-ileal anastomosis: a preliminary report of novel
modification—the flap-and-trough technique. BJU Int 2001;88:299.
http://www.blackwell-science.com/Products/Journals/Bjui/cases/
88.3/bju2328.htm.
[12] Stein JP, Grossfeld GD, Freeman JA, Esrig D, Ginsberg DA, Cote RJ,
et al. Orthotopic lower urinary tract reconstruction in women using the
Kock ileal neobladder: updated experience in 34 patients. J Urol
1997;158:400–5.
[13] International Reflux Study Committee. Medical versus surgical treatment of primary vesicoureteral reflux. Pediatrics 1981;67:392–400.
[14] Studer UE. Editorial comment. In: Stein JP, Freeman JA, Esrig D,
Elmajian DA, Tarter TH, Skinner EC, Boyd SD, Huffman JL, Lieskovsky G, Skinner DG. Complication of the afferent antireflux valve
mechanism in the Kock ileal reservoir. J Urol 1996;155:1579–84.
[15] Kristjánsson A, Abol-Enein H, Alm P, Mokhtar AA, Ghoneim MA,
Månsson W. Long-term renal morphology and function following
enterocystoplasty (refluxing or antireflux anastomosis): an experimental study. Br J Urol 1996;78:840–6.
[16] Richie JP, Skinner DG. Urinary diversion: the physiological rationale
for non-refluxing colonic conduits. Br J Urol 1975;47:269–75.
[17] Bernstein IT, Bennicke K, Rordam P, Klarskov P, Iversen HG. Bricker
ileal conduit urinary diversion with a simple nonrefluxing ureteroileal
anastomosis. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1991;25:29–33.
[18] Kristjánsson A, Bajc M, Willin L, Willner J, Månsson W. Renal
function up to 16 years after conduit (refluxing or antireflux anastomosis) or continent urinary diversion. 2. Renal scaring and location of
bacteriuria. Br J Urol 1995;76:546–50.
[19] Le Duc A, Camey M, Teillac P. An original antireflux uretero-ileal
implantation technique: long-term follow-up. J Urol 1987;137:1156–
8.
[20] Abol-Enein H, El-Baz M, Ghoneim MA. Optimalization of ureterointestinal anastomosis in urinary diversion: an experimental study in
dogs. I. Evaluation of the Le Duc technique. Urol Res 1993;21:125–9.
[21] Abol-Enein H, El-Baz M, Ghoneim MA. Optimalization of ureterointestinal anastomosis in urinary diversion: an experimental study in
dogs. II. Influence of exposure to urine on the healing of the ureter and
ileum. Urol Res 1993;21:131–4.
[22] Leadbetter WF. Consideration of problems incident to performance of
uretero-enterostomy: report of a technique. J Urol 1951;65:818–30.
[23] Goodwin WE, Harris AP, Kaufman JJ, Beal JM. Open transcolonic
ureterointestinal anastomosis: a new approach. Surg Gynecol Obstet
1953;97:295–300.
[24] Filmer RB, Spencer JR. Malignancies in bladder augmentations and
intestinal conduits. J Urol 1990;143:671–8.
[25] Patil U, Glassberg KI, Waterhouse K. Ileal conduit surgery with
nippled ureteroileal anastomoses. Urology 1976;7:594–7.
[26] Sullivan JN, Grabstald H, Whitmore WF. Complications of ureteroileal conduit with radical cystectomy: review of 336 cases. J Urol
1980;124:797–801.
[27] Jung P, Jakse G. Refluxive urinary anastomosis after Wallace I in
bladder substitution. Aktuel Urol 1997;28:287–90.
[28] Sagalowsky AI. Further experience with split-cuff nipple ureteral
reimplantation in urinary diversion. J Urol 1998;159:1843–4.
[29] Le Duc A, Camey M. The Le Duc-Camey method for reflux prevention. In: Webster GD, Goldwasser B, editors. Urinary Diversion:
Scientific Foundations and Clinical Practice. Oxford: Isis Medical
Media; 1995. p. 301–5.
[30] Shaaban AA, Gaballah MA, El-Diasty TA, Ghoneim MA. Urethral
controlled bladder substitution: a comparison between the intussuscepted nipple valve and the technique of Le Duc as antireflux
procedures. J Urol 1992;148:1156–61.
[31] Osman Y, Abol-Enein H, Nabed A, Gaballah M, Bazeed M. Long-term
results of a prospective randomized study comparing two different
antireflux techniques in orthotopic bladder substitution. Eur Urol
2004;45:82–6.
[32] Stein JP, Skinner DG. The craft of urologic surgery: The T pouch. Urol
Clin North Am 2003;30:647–62.