Advertisement

Partial Alloplastic Ureter Replacement with Polydioxanon and Vicryl Tube Implantations

  • H. Derouet
  • G. Seitz
  • B. Kopper
  • Th. Gebhardt
  • J. Günter
  • U. Gonser
Conference paper

Abstract

Since Boari’s experiment in 1895 using a glass tube as a ureter replacement, different materials such as artificial prostheses (Ziegler et al. 1972; Dreikorn et al. 1978; Bergmann et al. 1978; Varandy et al. 1982; Homann et al. 1984) or umbilical cord veins (Klippel and Hohenfellner 1979) have been examined for their use as ureter replacements. Only a few good clinical long-term results were reported (Ziegler and Konrad 1981). Because of somewhat disappointing results with the materials used up to now, we first experimentally examined absorbable polydioxanon and polyglactin 910 (vicryl)-tube-implantation for their applicability as segmental ureter replacements.

Keywords

Distal Ureter Transitional Epithelium Artificial Prosthesis Contrast Medium Extravasation Secondary Peristalsis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bartone Francis F et al (1977) Polyglactin 910 suture in urinary tract. Urology IX: 5Google Scholar
  2. Bergmann et al (1978) Biodegradable ureteral grafts in dogs. Invest Urol 16 /1Google Scholar
  3. Dreikorn K et al (1978) Alloplastic replacement of the canine ureter by expanded Polytetrafluorethylene (Gore-Tex) grafts. Eur Urol 4: 379–381PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Friedenstein AJ (1968) Induction of bone tissue by transitional epithelium. Clin Orth Rel Res 59: 121–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Graw M (1985) Künstlicher Harnleiter mit körpereigenem Antrieb. In: Harzmann R et al (eds) Ex-perimentelle Urologie. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Grégoir W (1984) Uretersubstitution heute. Therapiewoche 34: 46Google Scholar
  7. Homann W et al (1984) Long-term results of prothetic ureteral replacement in minipigs. Urol Int 39: 95–99PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Huggins CB (1931) The formation of bone under the influence of urinary tract. Arch Surg 22: 377–408Google Scholar
  9. Jonas D et al (1981) Splintless microsurgical anastomosis of the ureter in the dog. Urol Res 9: 271–279PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Klippel KF, Hohenfellner R (1979) Umbilical vein as ureteral replacement. Invest Urol 16 /6: 447–450PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Melchior H et al (1972) Die Problematik des segmentalen Ureter-Ersatzes durch alloplastisches Material. Urologe A 11: 41–45PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Varandy S et al (1982) Ureteral replacement with a new synthetic material Gore-Tex. J Urol 128: 171–175Google Scholar
  13. Ziegler M, Konrad G (1981) Long-term clinical follow-up after implantation of ureteral prosthesis. In: Wagenknecht L et al (eds) Genitourinary reconstruction with prosthesis. Thieme, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  14. Ziegler M et al (1972) Harnleiterersatz durch Silikonschläuche: Experimentelle und erste klinische Erfahrungen. Verhandlungsber Dtsch Ges Urol, pp 204–209Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Derouet
    • 1
  • G. Seitz
    • 2
  • B. Kopper
    • 1
  • Th. Gebhardt
    • 1
  • J. Günter
    • 3
  • U. Gonser
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of UrologyUniversity of Homburg/SaarHomburgGermany
  2. 2.Department of PathologyUniversity of Homburg/SaarHomburgGermany
  3. 3.Department of UrologyDistrict Hospital of Idar-ObersteinIdar-ObersteinGermany

Personalised recommendations