Renal transplantation and ureteroneocystostomy (living and cadaveric donor)

Taghavi, R.; Zafarghandi, R. Mahdavi; Darabi, Mohammad Reza

doi:10.1016/j.transproceed.2003.08.057

Cited by 2 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…). Twenty‐six studies (12 947 patients) were included in this systematic review, of which two RCTs and 24 observational studies . Study sizes varied between 70 and 2548 patients.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Twenty‐three studies were included in the meta‐analyses (Table ) . Data were pooled for the LG versus PL comparison and for the LG versus U comparison . The mean prevalence of outcome variables is presented in Table .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These data were included in the LG group. Taghavi assessed a modified LG technique with minimal bladder wall dissection . These data were also added to the LG group.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Twenty-three studies were included in the meta-analyses (Table 4) [13][14][15][16][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38]. Data were pooled for the LG versus PL comparison and for the LG versus U comparison [13][14][15][16][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38]. The mean prevalence of outcome variables is presented in Table 5.…”

Section: Outcome Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The most frequently used techniques are the intravesical Politano‐Leadbetter (PL), the extravesical Campos Freire technique, better known as Lich‐Gregoir (LG) and the Taguchi or U‐stitch (U) technique . Several studies have compared these techniques . However, the effect of the ureterovesical anastomotic technique on the development of urological complications and which one is to be preferred continues to be a subject of discussion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Ureterovesical anastomotic techniques for kidney transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryNo consensus exists about which ureterovesical anastomosis technique to use for kidney transplantation. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the existing techniques in relation to the risk of urological complications. All studies that compared ureterovesical anastomotic techniques in kidney transplantation were included. Study endpoints were urinary leakage, ureteral stricture, vesicoureteral reflux and hematuria. Subanalyses of stented and nonstented techniques were performed. Two randomized clinical trials and 24 observational studies were included. Meta-analyses were performed on the Lich-Gregoir (LG) versus Politano-Leadbetter (PL) techniques and LG versus U-stitch (U) techniques. Compared with the PL technique, the LG technique had a significantly lower prevalence of urinary leakage (risk ratio (RR): 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.30 to 0.75) and a significantly lower prevalence of hematuria when compared with both PL and U techniques (RR: 0.28, 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.49 and RR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.50, respectively), regardless of ureteral stenting. There was no difference in the prevalence of ureteral strictures or vesicoureteral reflux between the various techniques. Of the three most frequently used ureterovesical anastomotic techniques, the LG technique results in fewer urological complications than the PL and U techniques.

show abstract

“…). Twenty‐six studies (12 947 patients) were included in this systematic review, of which two RCTs and 24 observational studies . Study sizes varied between 70 and 2548 patients.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These data were included in the LG group. Taghavi assessed a modified LG technique with minimal bladder wall dissection . These data were also added to the LG group.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Outcome Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Ureterovesical anastomotic techniques for kidney transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Intravesical Versus Extravesical Ureteroneocystostomy in Kidney Transplantation

Slagt

Klop²,

IJzermans³

et al. 2012

Transplantation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urological complications are still a major problem postoperatively with a reported incidence of up to 30%, associated with significant morbidity, mortality, prolonged hospital stay and high medical costs. To date, there is no evidence favouring either an extravesical or an intravesical approach. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine if an intravesical or extravesical anastomosis in kidney transplantation is to be preferred. Comprehensive searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library. Reference lists were searched manually. The methodology was in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Two randomized controlled trials and seventeen cohort studies were identified. Based on the meta-analysis, outcome was in favour of the extravesical anastomosis. A relative risk (RR) for stenosis of 0.67 (confidence interval (CI), 0.48-0.93; p = 0.02), for leakage 0.55 (CI 0.39-0.80; p = 0.001) for the total number of urological complications 0.56 (CI 0.41-0.76; p < 0.001) and for haematuria of 0.41 (CI 0.22-0.76; p = 0.005) was demonstrated. Based on our results, we conclude that there is evidence in favour of the extravesical ureteroneocystostomy for having a smaller amount of urological complications in kidney transplantation.

show abstract

Renal transplantation and ureteroneocystostomy (living and cadaveric donor)

Cited by 2 publications

References 9 publications

Ureterovesical anastomotic techniques for kidney transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Ureterovesical anastomotic techniques for kidney transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Intravesical Versus Extravesical Ureteroneocystostomy in Kidney Transplantation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About