Routine ureteric stenting before cytoreductive surgery plus HIPEC in managing peritoneal carcinomatosis from gyn malignancies

Blogger's Note: in general terms the acknowledged 'best' imaging for ureters is CT urogram

abstract
  Routine ureteric stenting before cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in managing peritoneal carcinomatosis from gynecologic malignancies: a single-center experience. (authors: Saudia Arabia/Egypt)

BACKGROUND:

Iatrogenic ureteric injury is a rare, yet serious operative complication in gynecologic procedures and associated with substantial morbidities such as prolonged hospitalization, additional financial-based ureter-related repairing procedures, impaired renal function, and compromised quality of life. Direct visual identification of ureters can be very challenging in managing patients with primary advanced or recurrent disseminated intraperitoneal gynecologic malignancies, who are referred to complex procedures such as cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC).

AIMS:

To report our single-center experience (feasibility and morbidity) with prophylactic ureteric stents as a routine practice before CRS+HIPEC procedure in managing peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) from gynecologic malignancies.

METHODS:

From June-2010 to March-2014, all patients with gynecologic-related PC, managed with CRS+HIPEC, and underwent prophylactic ureteric stents. The data were retrospectively abstracted and analyzed.

RESULTS:

Fifty-three patients were identified. Almost all PC cases were secondary/recurrence presentations (90.6 %) and originated from ovarian cancer (84.9 %). Optimal cytoreduction microscopic residual disease) was achieved in 35 patients (60 %). Average insertion time of ureteric stents was 8.9 ± 3.3 min. Fifty-two patients (98.1 %) received bilateral ureteric stents. Forty-nine patients (92.5 %) had their ureteric stents removed by the end of procedure. No patient experienced major peri-operative urinary tract-related complications.

CONCLUSIONS:

Prophylactic ureteric stents appeared to be feasible, potentially safe, and could reduce the risk of iatrogenic ureteric injuries without incurring an increase in urinary tract-related complications. Prophylactic ureteric stenting does not eliminate the necessity for competent anatomical knowledge, meticulous retroperitoneal dissection and direct intra-operative visualization of ureters.