Citation

Abid AF, Hashem HL. Urol. Ann. 2010; 2(1): 17-20.

Affiliation

Al-Yarmouk Teaching Hospital, College of Medicine, The University of Mustanisriya, Baghdad, Iraq.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2010, Medknow Publications)

DOI

10.4103/0974-7796.62920

PMID

20842252

PMCID

PMC2934583

Abstract

CONTEXT: Penetrating rather than blunt trauma is the most common cause of ureteral injuries. The approach to management differs from the far more common iatrogenic injury. AIMS: The purpose of this series is to report our experience in ureteral trauma management, with attention to the diagnosis, repair, and outcome of these injuries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From April 2003 to October 2009, all abdominal trauma cases received alive, reviewed for penetrating ureteric injuries RESULTS: A total of twenty (fifteen male, five female) penetrating ureteral injuries were evaluated. All penetrating ureteric injuries were due to (9 gunshot and 11 shells from explosive devices). Since the patients had a clear indication for surgery, no IVU or CT scan was done preoperatively, major intra-abdominal injuries were often associated. The diagnosis of ureteric injury was made intraoperatively in 8 cases (40%) While, twelve cases (60%) were diagnosed postoperatively. Eight ureteric injuries (40%) were proximal 1/3, 4 (20%) to middle 1/3 and 8 (40%) to the distal 1/3. Management was with stenting in 2 patients, ureteroureterostomy in 8, ureteroneocystostomy in 6, and nephrectomy in 4. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, a delay in diagnosis was a contributory factor in morbidity related to ureteral injury, the need for second operation in already compromised patients from associated injuries, The presence of shock on admission, delayed diagnosis, and colon injuries were associated with a high complication rate. Ureteral injuries must be considered early during the evaluation of penetrating abdominal injuries.

Language: en