Journal of Pediatric Urology
Volume 4, Issue 1 , Pages 14-19, February 2008

The appendix as ureteral substitute: A report of 10 cases

  • Haitham Dagash

      Affiliations

    • Department of Paediatric Urology, Sheffield Children's Hospital, Western Bank, Sheffield S10 2TH, UK
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +44 1142717515; fax: +44 1142260543.
  • ,
  • Sudipta Sen

      Affiliations

    • Christian Medical College and Hospital, Vellore, India
  • ,
  • Jacob Chacko

      Affiliations

    • Christian Medical College and Hospital, Vellore, India
  • ,
  • Sampath Karl

      Affiliations

    • Christian Medical College and Hospital, Vellore, India
  • ,
  • Dhruv Ghosh

      Affiliations

    • Christian Medical College and Hospital, Vellore, India
  • ,
  • Pulak Parag

      Affiliations

    • Ekta Institute of Child Health, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India
  • ,
  • A.E. MacKinnon

      Affiliations

    • Department of Paediatric Urology, Sheffield Children's Hospital, Western Bank, Sheffield S10 2TH, UK

Received 27 February 2007; accepted 13 August 2007. published online 29 October 2007.

Abstract 

Background

Ureteric replacement in part or in total is rarely needed in children. We present our experience in using the appendix to replace the ureter.

Methods

A retrospective case note review was carried out at Sheffield Children's Hospital (UK), Ekta Institute of Child Health (Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India) and Christian Medical College Hospital (Vellore, India) of all cases of ureteric substitution using the appendix.

Results

Ten patients were identified, operated in 2002–2007: seven males and three females with a median age of 2.5years (range 2.5months to 12years). The reasons for ureteric replacement were traumatic ureteric avulsion (n=1), congenital ureteric stenosis (n=5), non-drainage following previous pyeloplasty for pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction (n=3) and ureteric stricture following reimplantation for vesico-ureteric reflux (n=1). The appendix was used in an anti-peristaltic manner in all cases, and in one case a transureteroureterostomy was performed. At a median follow up of 16months (1–72months), all the patients were well except one whose kidney function had deteriorated.

Conclusions

Total or partial replacement of the ureter using the appendix, even in the first year of life, preserved renal function in nine cases. Ureteric continuity can be successfully restored in children using the appendix.

keywords: Appendix, Ureter, Ureteral substitution

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1477-5131(07)00417-2

doi:10.1016/j.jpurol.2007.08.004

Journal of Pediatric Urology
Volume 4, Issue 1 , Pages 14-19, February 2008