Buccal ureteroplasty options, techniques, long-term results

Purpose of the study. Surgical treatment of extended strictures and obliterations of the ureter is still a complicated problem of modern urology. The aim of the study was to analyze our own experience of ureteral replacement plastic surgery with buccal graft, i.e buccal ureteroplasty (BU) with its extended strictures/obliterations.

Patients and methods. We’ve observed 25 patients who underwent BU. The lower third of the ureter was affected in 3 (12.0 %) cases, the lower third and the mouth of the ureter was affected in 7 people (28.0 %), the middle third in 2 (8.0 %), the upper third in 5 patients (20.0 %), the combined lesion of the upper third of the ureter and the pelvic‑ureteral segment (PUS) was in 8 (32.0 %) patients. All patients underwent repeated operations on a ureter, all revealed a significant comorbid background. The surgery was performed with a tubularized buccal graft in 13 (52.0 %), the onlay technique was applied in 12 (48.0 %). Laparoscopic surgery was performed in 10 (40.0 %) patients, surgical aid was carried out in an open way in 15 (60 %).

Results. Severe complications according to the Clavien‑Dindo classification, requiring hospitalization of patients in the intensive care unit with organ dysfunction, as well as lethal outcomes were absent. The follow‑up period of patients ranged from 1 to 57 months (an average of 14.7 months). One patient after laparoscopic BU with a tubular graft had a short (1 mm) stenosis in the anastomosis area for 6 months of follow‑up, which was successfully eliminated by laser endoureterotomy. During the entire follow‑up period, residual hydronephrosis was recorded in 4 patients (16.0 %) against the background of complete patency of the anastomosis. A control flexible ureteroscopy performed in 16 (64.0 %) patients did not reveal rejection of the buccal graft. There are still 20 patients under our supervision.

Conclusion. Our experience shows that the implementation of BU is possible on any part of the VMP using various techniques. This operation can be regarded as the "second" line of surgical treatment of strictures and obliterations of the ureter, especially after unsuccessful attempts of other reconstructions in a group of patients with severe concomitant pathology.

1. Nishimura Y, Moriya K, Nakamura M, Kitta T, Kanno Y, Chiba H, et al. Laparoscopic ureterocalicostomy for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in a 10‑year‑old female patient: a case report. BMC Res Notes. 2017 Jul 6;10(1):247. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104‑017‑2569‑x

2. Srivastava D, Sureka SK, Yadav P, Bansal A, Gupta S, Kapoor R, et al. Ureterocalicostomy for Reconstruction of Complicated Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction in Adults: Long‑Term Outcome and Factors Predicting Failure in a Contemporary Cohort. J Urol. 2017 Dec;198(6):1374–1378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.06.079

3. Xiong S, Wang J, Zhu W, Yang K, Ding G, Li X, et al. Onlay Repair Technique for the Management of Ureteral Strictures: A Comprehensive Review. Biomed Res Int. 2020;2020:6178286. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/6178286

4. Ganpule AP, Singh AG, Islam MR, Sonawane P, Sabnis RB, Desai MR. Robotic buccal mucosa graft ureteroplasty (inlay and onlay) for upper ureteric stricture: Point of technique. J Minim Access Surg. 2018 Dec;14(4):357–361. https://doi.org/10.4103/jmas.JMAS_188_17

5. Tracey AT, Eun DD, Stifelman MD, Hemal AK, Stein RJ, Mottrie A, et al. Robotic‑assisted laparoscopic repair of ureteral injury: an evidence‑based review of techniques and outcomes. Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2018 Jun;70(3):231–241. https://doi.org/10.23736/S0393‑2249.18.03137‑5

6. Bryk DJ, Yamaguchi Y, Zhao LC. Tissue transfer techniques in reconstructive urology. Korean J Urol. 2015 Jul;56(7):478–486. https://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2015.56.7.478

7. Volkov AA, Zuban ON, Budnik NV, Saenko GI. Surgical treatment of extended strictures and ureteral obliterations using oral mucosa graft. Our own experience. Experimental and Clinical Urology. 2020;(3):124‑131. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.29188/2222‑8543‑2020‑12‑3‑124‑131

8. Lee Z, Keehn AY, Sterling ME, Metro MJ, Eun DD. A Review of Buccal Mucosa Graft Ureteroplasty. Curr Urol Rep. 2018 Mar 1;19(4):23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934‑018‑0772‑5

9. Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD, et al. The Clavien‑Dindo classification of surgical complications: five‑year experience. Ann Surg. 2009 Aug;250(2):187–196. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b13ca2

10. Somerville JJ, Naude JH. Segmental ureteric replacement: an animal study using a free non‑pedicled graft. Urol Res. 1984;12(2):115–119. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00257176

11. Naude JH. Buccal mucosal grafts in the treatment of ureteric lesions. BJU Int. 1999 May;83(7):751–754. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464‑410x.1999.00019.x

12. Kroepfl D, Loewen H, Klevecka V, Musch M. Treatment of long ureteric strictures with buccal mucosal grafts. BJU Int. 2010 May;105(10):1452–1455. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464‑410X.2009.08994.x

13. Hefermehl LJ, Tritschler S, Kretschmer A, Beck V, Stief CG, Schlenker B, et al. Open ureteroplasty with buccal mucosa graft for long proximal strictures: A good option for a rare problem. Investig Clin Urol. 2020 May;61(3):316–322. https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.2020.61.3.316

14. Katibov MI, Bogdanov AB, Dovlatov ZA. Buccal urethroplasty: 2020 literature review update. Experimental and clinical urology. 2020;(3):118–123. https://doi.org/10.29188/2222‑8543‑2020‑12‑3‑118‑123

15. Lee M, Lee Z, Koster H, Jun M, Asghar AM, Lee R, et al. Intermediate‑term outcomes after robotic ureteral reconstruction for long‑segment (≥4 centimeters) strictures in the proximal ureter: A multi‑institutional experience. Investig Clin Urol. 2021 Jan;62(1):65–71. https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.20200298

16. Katibov MI, Polyakov NV, Keshishev NG, Apolikhin OI, Kaprin AD. Use of buccal graft for the management of ureteral strictures. Urology. 2018;1:138–142. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18565/urology.2018.1.138‑142

17. Del Pozo Jiménez G, Castillón‑Vela I, Carballido Rodríguez J. Buccal mucosa graft for the treatment of long ureteral stenosis: Bibliographic review. Arch Esp Urol. 2017 May;70(4):445–453.

18. Fahmy O, Schubert T, Khairul‑Asri MG, Stenzl A, Gakis G. Total proximal ureter substitution using buccal mucosa. Int J Urol. 2017 Apr;24(4):320–323 https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.13307

19. Guliev BG, Komyakov BK, Avazkhanov ZhP. Buccal grafting of extended strictures of proximal ureter (Review). Experimental and Clinical Urology. 2019;(4):86–91. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.29188/2222‑8543‑2019‑11‑4‑86‑91

20. Tsaturyan A, Akopyan K, Levonyan A, Tsaturyan A. Long ureteric stricture replacement by buccal mucosa graft: an Armenian experience case series report. Cent European J Urol. 2016;69(2):217–220. https://doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2016.757

21. Trapeznikova MF, Bazaev VV, Shibaev AN, Lukyanchikov AG, Vinogradov AV. Replacement plastic reconstruction of extended ureteral stricture using buccal mucosa autograft. Urology. 2014;(2):16–19. (In Russ.).

22. Volkov AA, Budnik NV, Zuban ON, Abdulaev MA, Plotkin DV, Reshetnikov MN. Buccal ureteroplasty for recurrent extended strictures and obliterations of distal ureter. Bulletin of RSMU. 2020;(6):117–125. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.24075/vrgmu.2020.079

23. Volkov AA, Budnik NV, Mustapaev ID. Buccal ureteroplasty in a patient with an extended stricture of the proximal ureter of a solitary kidney. Innovative Medicine of Kuban. 2021;(3):52–56. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.35401/2500‑0268‑2021‑23‑3‑52‑56

24. Volkov АА, Zuban ON, Budnik NV, Muziev АV. Buccal mucosal grafts in surgery of urethral tuberculosis. Tuberculosis and Lung Diseases. 2021;99(9):15–22. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21292/2075‑1230‑2021‑99‑9‑15‑22