Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_1100_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
02.09.2026
Размер:
21 Мб
Скачать
36934 Intraoperative Ureteral Injury
anastomotic leak is demonstrated. A urinary leak occurs in approximately 10–24 % of ureteroure­terostomy repairs. Most early postoperative leaks can be managed with continued closed-suction drainage.
Outcomes
Recognition and treatment of ureteric injuries at the time of surgery are associated with less mor­bidity compared to those in whom the diagnosis was delayed. In patients with prompt diagnosis of ureteric injury, Al-Awadi et
al. demonstrated a 94 % successful resolution of ureteric injuries [18
]. The success rate for a ureteroureterostomy
%. Between 10 and 24 % of early repairs
is 90 develop a urine leak, which is managed with the drain stricture develops in approximately 10 teroureterostomy
placed intraoperatively [18]. A ureteral
% of ure-
repairs. Ureteral strictures are late complications and can be managed endo­scopically with balloon dilation. If endoscopic management is unsuccessful, then open repair is required. Ileal replacement of the ureter has a reported success rate of 83–100
% [26]. Armatys et al. reported a 3 % anastomotic stricture and 6 % fistula rate after
ileal replacement [26]. Ileal re­placement of the ureter can result in hyperchlore­mic metabolic acidosis, which can be treated by sodium bicarbonate. Pisters et that the overall success rate of a
al. demonstrated
TUU, measured in terms of patent anastomosis and bilateral func­tioning kidneys, is greater than 95
Psoas
hitch and Boari flap have also been
% [24].
shown to be highly successful. Long-term suc­cess rates have been reported from 95 to 100 [5, 6
, 18, 22]. Ureteral reflux typically does not
%
lead to long-term complications. Obstruction at the reimplantation site has been reported in ap-
proximately 5−10
%, which is
typically managed
with endoscopic dilation [5, 6, 18, 22].
Key Points to Avoiding Injury
1. Knowledge of the ureter anatomy is essential
to avoid injury.
2. Preoperative imaging should be reviewed to determine the anatomy of the ureter and the possibility of the ureter being involved by tumor.
3. Prophylatic ureteral stents should be placed in high-risk patients.
4. The ureter should be identified with meticu­lous dissection early in the procedure.
5.
Visualization of the
ureter must be performed
before transection of colonic mesentery.
Key Points to Diagnosis and Manage the Complication
1. Lower ureteral injuries are the most common injuries and should be managed with ureteral reimplantation to the bladder. Avoid primary ureteroureterostomy for lower ureteral injures.
2. If an injury is suspected intraoperatively, in­digo carmine can be given intravenously and the ureter observed for extravasation of dye.
3. If an injury is detected intraoperatively, the ureter should be debrided to healthy tissue and a spatulated tension-free anastomosis should be performed if possible. The type of repair depends on the site and type of injury.
4. If an injury is suspected postoperatively, the BUN and Cr of an intra-abdominal fluid col­lection or drain fluid can be compared to the patient’s serum level.
5. A retrograde pyelogram can give the precise location of injury, and a stent could be de­ployed over the injury.
References
1. Stief CG, Jonas U, Raab R. Long-term follow-up after surgery for advanced colorectal carcinoma involving the urogenital tract. Eur Urol. 2002;41(5):546–50. PubMed PMID: 12074797. Epub 2002/06/21. eng.
2.
Fujisawa M, Nakamura T, Ohno M, Miyazaki J,
kawa S, Haraguchi T, et al. Surgical management of the urinary tract in patients with locally advanced colorectal cancer. Urology. 2002;60(6):983–7. PubMed PMID: 12475654. Epub 2002/12/12. eng.
3. Andersson A, Bergdahl L. Urologic complications following abdominoperineal resection of the rectum. Arch Surg. 1976;111(9):969–71. (Chicago, Ill: 1960). PubMed PMID: 949259. Epub 1976/09/01. eng.
Ara-
370 W. Shannon Orr et al.
4. da Silva G, Boutros M, Wexner SD. Role of pro­phylactic ureteric stents in colorectal surgery. Asian J Endosc Surg. 2012;5(3):105–10. PubMed PMID:
22776608. Epub 2012/07/11. eng.
5. Delacroix SE Jr, recognition and management. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2010;23(3):221. PubMed PMID: 21886472. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC2967322. Epub 2011/09/03. eng.
6. Selzman AA, Spirnak JP. Latrogenic ureteral juries: a 20-year experience in treating 165 inju­ries. J Urol. 1996;155(3):878–81. PubMed PMID:
8583597. Epub 1996/03/01. eng.
7. Kramhoft J, Kronborg O, Backer OG, Sprechler M. Urologic complications after operations for anorectal cancer, with an evaluation of preopera­tive intravenous pyelography. Dis Colon Rectum. 1975;18(2):118–22. PubMed PMID: 47284. Epub 1975/03/01. eng.
8. Kyzer S, Gordon PH. The al catheters during colorectal operations. Am Surg. 1994;60(3):212–6. PubMed PMID: 8116985. Epub 1994/03/01. eng.
9. Bothwell WN, Bleicher RJ, Dent ureteral catheterization in colon surgery. A five­year review. Dis Colon Rectum. 1994;37(4):330–4. PubMed PMID: 8168411. Epub 1994/04/01. eng.
10.
Chahin F, Dwivedi AJ, Paramesh
Agrawal S, Chahin C, et lighted ureteral stenting in laparoscopic colectomy. JSLS J Soc Laparoendosc Surgeons/Soc Laparoen­dosc Surgeons. 2002;6(1):49–52. PubMed PMID:
12002296. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3043401. Epub 2002/05/11. eng.
11. Leff EI, Groff W, Rubin RJ, Eisenstat TE, Salvati EP. Use of ureteral catheters in colonic and rectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum. 1982;25(5):457–60. PubMed PMID: 7094783. Epub 1982/07/01. eng.
12.
Pokala N, Delaney CP, Kiran RP, Bast J,
K, Fazio VW. A randomized controlled trial compar­ing simultaneous intra-operative vs sequential pro­phylactic ureteric catheter insertion in re-operative and complicated colorectal surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2007;22(6):683–7. PubMed PMID: 17031654. Epub 2006/10/13. eng.
13.
Senagore AJ, Luchtefeld M.
with lighted ureteral catheters during laparoscopic colectomy. J Laparoendosc Surg. 1994;4(6):399–
403. PubMed PMID: 7881143. Epub 1994/12/01. eng.
14.
Natsis K, Piagkou M, Skotsimara A, Protogerou
V, Tsitouridis I, Skandalakis P. Horseshoe kidney: a review of anatomy and pathology. Surg Radiol Anat SRA. 2014;36(6):517–26. PubMed PMID:
24178305. Epub 2013/11/01. eng.
Winters JC. Urinary tract injuries:
in-
prophylactic use of ureter-
TL. Prophylactic
al. The implications
A, Chau W,
Angermeier
An initial experience
of
15.
Cass AS, Bubrick MP
surgery. Urology. 1981;18(4):359–64. PubMed PMID: 7292814. Epub 1981/10/01. eng.
16.
Al-Awadi K,
Khayat A. Latrogenic ureteric injuries: incidence, aetiological factors and the effect of early manage­ment on subsequent outcome. Int Urol Nephrol. 2005;37(2):235–41. PubMed PMID: 16142549. Epub 2005/09/06. eng.
17.
Beahrs JR, Beahrs OH, Beahrs MM, Leary FJ. Uri-
nary tract complications Surg. 1978;187(5):542–8. PubMed PMID: 646493. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC1396539. Epub 1978/05/01. eng.
18.
Wong MH, Lim SK,
kidney injury with recurrent ascites due to intraperi­toneal urine leakage. Intern Med J. 2012;42(7):848–
9. PubMed PMID: 22805694. Epub 2012/07/19. eng.
19.
Watterson JD, Mahoney
Latrogenic ureteric injuries: approaches to etiology and management. Can J Surg. 1998;41(5):379–82. PubMed PMID: 9793505. Epub 1998/10/30. eng.
20.
Zinman LM, Libertino JA, Roth RA. Management
operative ureteral injury. Urol. 1978;12(3):290–
of
303. PubMed PMID: 706021. Epub 1978/09/01. eng.
21.
Boxer RJ, Fritzsche P, Skinner DG, Kaufman JJ,
Belt E, Smith RB, et al. Replacement of the ureter by
intestine: clinical application and results of the
small ileal ureter in 89 patients. J Urol. 1979;121(6):728–
31. PubMed PMID: 458942. Epub 1979/06/01. eng.
22.
Pisters PW, Pettaway CA, Liu P
JF, Leibovici D. Is transureteroureterostomy per­formed during multi-organ resection for non-uro­thelial malignancy safe and effective? J Surg Oncol. 2012;106(1):62–5. PubMed PMID: 22259198. Epub 2012/01/20. eng.
23.
Brandes S, Coburn M, Armenakas N, McAninch J.
Diagnosis and management of ureteric idence-based analysis. BJU Int. 2004;94(3):277–89. PubMed PMID: 15291852. Epub 2004/08/05. eng.
24.
Liu C, Zhang X, Xue D, Liu
realignment in the management of complete tran­sected ureter. Int Urol Nephrol. 2014;46(2):335–40. PubMed PMID: 23925502. Epub 2013/08/08. eng.
25.
Cormio L. Ureteric injuries. Clinical
perimental studies. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl. 1995;171:1–66. PubMed PMID: 8578244. Epub 1995/01/01. eng.
26.
Armatys SA, Mellon MJ, Beck SD, Koch MO,
Foster RS, Bihrle R. Use of ileum as ureteral placement in urological reconstruction. J Urol. 2009;181(1):177–81. PubMed PMID: 19013597. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC2667902. Epub 2008/11/18. eng.
. Ureteral injuries in colonic
Kehinde EO, Al-Hunayan A, Al-
with rectal surgery. Ann
Ng KL, Ng KP. Pseudo-acute
JE, Futter NG, Gaffield J.
, Matin SF, Ward
injury: an ev-
Y, Wang P. Endoscopic
and ex-
re-
ProstaticUrethral Injury
Negar M. Salehomoum and Steven D. Wexner
35
Introduction
Colorectal surgery frequently involves pelvic dis­section for both benign and malignant conditions. While the ureter is more commonly injured dur­ing pelvic surgery, the urethra is not immune [1]. The most common urethral injury in colorectal surgery is secondary to traumatic Foley catheter placement. We herein discuss prostatic urethral injuries, specifically offering tips on preven­tion, methods of detection, and management of injuries.
Anatomy
An important factor to help reduce the risk of prostatic urethral injuries is a thorough under­standing of its anatomy. The urethra can be ana­tomically divided into an anterior and posterior portion, separated by the genitourinary perineal membrane.
The anterior urethra, also known as the spongy or cavernous urethra, consists of the bul­bous portion and pendulous, or penile, portion. The bulbous portion starts at the genitourinary perineal membrane and extends to the penoscro­tal junction where the pendulous portion begins
S. D. Wexner () · N. M. Salehomoum Department of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, 2950 Cleveland Clinic Blvd, Weston, FL 33331, USA e-mail: wexners@ccf.org
and extends to the external meatus. Figure 35.1 illustrates this anatomy.
The posterior urethra is composed of the pros­tatic urethra and the membranous, or intermedi­ate, portion of the urethra. The prostatic urethra is the first portion of the urethra leading to the inter­mediate portion which is enclosed by the sphinc­ter urethrae muscle. While the membranous por­tion of the posterior urethra is most commonly injured secondary to pelvic fractures, the prostat­ic segment of the posterior urethra is susceptible to iatrogenic injury [2]. The majority of prostatic urethral injuries are secondary to prostatic resec­tions such as transurethral prostatic resections (TURP) or radical prostatectomies. Figure 35.2 demonstrates the close relation between the pros­tatic urethra and rectum, which makes it suscep­tible to iatrogenic injury during pelvic surgery. The discussion within this chapter is limited to injuries of the prostatic urethra which can occur during colorectal surgeries.
Incidence
Colorectal operations at risk for injuring the ure­thra include proctectomies and abdominoperi­neal resections. Such injuries may occur during dissection for either benign or malignant condi­tions. This fact is not surprising considering that the anterior portion of the lower rectum is inti­mately associated with the posterior border of the prostate.
T. M. Pawlik et al. (eds.), Gastrointestinal Surgery, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-2223-9_35, © Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015
371
372 N. M. Salehomoum and S. D. Wexner
Fig. 35.1 The anterior and posterior portions of the urethra are depicted
Types of Prostatic Urethral Injury
During pelvic surgery and dissection of the rec­tum, the prostatic urethra is prone to two different types of injury. Transection of the urethra during sharp dissection may lead to immediate urine leakage although transection with an energy de­vice may temporarily occlude the lumen result­ing in a delayed leak. Pelvic dissection with elec-
trocautery may lead to ischemia of the urethra followed either by a stricture or a delayed leak.
Prevention
The key to preventing a prostatic urethral injury, or any urinary injury for that matter, is to be vigilant about the risk. This risk is increased in patients
37335 Prostatic Urethral Injury
Fig. 35.2 Demonstration of the anatomy of the urethra in relation to the rectum. The straight arrow points to the rectum. The wavy arrow points to the prostatic urethra
with bulky anterior rectal tumors, a history of radiation, and/or history of a prostatectomy, all of which may obliterate the rectoprostatic space. The inflammation and scar tissue in the former setting make it difficult to visualize and dissect in the plane immediately anterior to the rectopros­tatic, or Denonvillier’s fascia. The large inflamed rectum in patients with proctitis and following an anastomotic leak also increases the risk of injury.
One technique to facilitate awareness of the location of the urethra is the placement of a large diameter Foley catheter. Alternatively, urethral sounds may be more easily palpated intraop­eratively secondary to their rigidity. The wider diameter catheter can help the surgeon palpate the prostatic urethra especially when nearing it. However, it is important to not have an over­whelming sense of security with this technique as it may still be difficult to identify the loca­tion of the urethra in cases of previous radiation and/or prostatectomy. When reoperating on pa­tients following a pelvic anastomotic leak or for a recurrent rectal carcinoma, special vigilance is needed.
Detection
Should the surgeon encounter the unfortunate situation of having injured the prostatic urethra, the ideal time for detecting the injury is during surgery. Early recognition may allow for syn­chronous repair and may potentially allow for a better repair without having to subsequently re­enter the pelvis.
Some surgeons advocate the routine use of in­digo carmine or methylene blue during colorectal surgeries in which the urinary system is at risk. Therefore, if the surgeon is concerned about the prostatic urethra, such as in cases where bulky tumors or radiation have eliminated the normal planes, the anesthesiologist can administer 10 mL of indigo carmine or methylene blue intravenous­ly with or without furosemide to expedite diure­sis. Another intraoperative method for detecting injuries is to inject 10–20 ml of methylene blue via an angiocatheter placed in the urethra adja­cent to the Foley catheter [1]. Again, any visual­ized extravasation of methylene blue would indi­cate injury to the urinary tract.
The surgeon may also encounter delayed rec­ognition of urethral injury. Postoperative signs of urinary injury may include a rise in blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and creatinine levels secondary to urinary absorption from the peritoneal cav­ity and an increase in drain output, particularly if serous in quality. If an injury is suspected, the drain output can be sent to the laboratory for a creatinine level. A drain creatinine level in excess of the serum creatinine level indicates a urinary leak. A renal ultrasound may indicate dilata­tion of the more proximal urinary system or a distended bladder if the urethra is strictured. A computed tomography scan of the abdomen and pelvis with intravenous contrast may also be used to detect urinary injuries; however, the contrast must have reached the site of injury for extrava­sation to occur and will not indicate the specific site of injury.
A retrograde urethrogram can also be used to visualize urethral injuries, either intraoperatively or postoperatively. Rosenstein and Alsikafi have
374 N. M. Salehomoum and S. D. Wexner
provided a detailed description the technical aspects of performing a retrograde urethrogram [3]. The patient is first positioned supine on the table, and then the left pelvis is elevated 30–45° from the table. The right thigh is bent at a right angle to the hip while the left leg is kept straight. A 14 French Foley catheter is then inserted into the tip of the penis and the Foley balloon dis­tended with 2 ml of water; 30 ml of water-soluble contrast is then injected and a radiograph expo­sure taken at least near the end of the injection if not throughout the injection. This technique will allow appropriate visualization of the entire ure­thra and any leaks or strictures.
Management
A prostatic urethral injury detected at any time should lead to a urology consultation if available and primary repair at the initial operation. It is important to keep in mind that most data regard­ing the management and outcome of prostatic urethral injuries are based on traumatic urethral disruptions.
Intraoperative detection of a prostatic ure­thral injury will potentially allow for a primary repair if able to be performed in a tension-free manner [1]. The two ends of the urethra should be spatulated in such a repair to try to obviate subsequent anastomotic stricture. In patients who have undergone pelvic radiation, it may be pru­dent to reinforce the repair with omentum, a local tissue flap, and/or a biologic mesh [1]. In cases of significant loss of urethra, urethral reconstruc­tion has been described using a pedicled gracilis flap [4]. During intraoperative repair of the ure­thra, if there is difficulty in identifying the more proximal urethra after a complete transection, a urethral sound may be placed through either a suprapubic location or by creating an anterior cystotomy.
Prostatic urethral injuries that are detected postoperatively are more difficult to manage. Un­less a patient is within the first few postoperative days, there will likely be significant adhesions in the pelvis making any immediate surgical ap­proach more difficult. Experience with traumatic
posterior urethral injuries indicates that primary urethral realignment results in lower rates of fibrotic defects compared to primary bladder drainage with plans for delayed urethroplasty; however, the erectile dysfunction and urinary in­continence rates were higher [57]. Other authors have reported lower rates of erectile dysfunction and urinary incontinence following surgical re­alignment [810]. Primary urethral realignment can be performed either surgically, transab­dominal or transperineal, or endoscopically. A urethral stricture, either from cautery injury or following initial management of the injury with primary urethral realignment, may be amenable to bulboprostatic anastomotic urethroplasty via either an abdominoperineal or transperineal ap­proach [1113]. It is important to keep in mind that some degree of the complications described with the various techniques may be related to the traumatic mechanism of injury.
The key to managing any urinary injury is to allow adequate drainage of the urinary system. A bladder catheter should be kept in place across the urethral injury postoperatively to keep the bladder decompressed. Some authors also advo­cate placing a suprapubic catheter in addition to the bladder catheter to ensure appropriate drain­age should one mechanism fail. If, however, the urethral injury is postoperatively detected, a su­prapubic catheter should be placed for drainage.
Additionally, drains placed adjacent to any of the above-discussed repairs will enable detection of urinary extravasation and, more importantly, help ensure adequate drainage should a urine leak or a fistula develop.
Delayed Rectourethral Fistula
A delayed urethral injury may also present as a rectourethral fistula. These patients may pres­ent with pneumaturia, fecaluria, urine draining through the rectum, or recurrent urinary tract infections. Different modes of treatment exist in the treatment of delayed iatrogenic rectourethral fistulas including transperineal, transanal, trans­sphincteric, and transabdominal approaches [14].
37535 Prostatic Urethral Injury
Transperineal repairs usually involve clo­sure of the rectum and/or closure of the urethral opening. These outcomes are improved by inter­posing muscle between the rectal and urethral repairs, especially if the pelvis was previously irradiated. The gracilis muscle and dartos mus­cle interposition flaps are well described in the treatment of rectourethral fistulas [1518]. The preference of the authors is to perform gracilis in­terposition flaps for pelvic fistula disease specifi­cally using the transperineal approach because it provides great access to the fistula, brings a large piece of viable muscle to help buttress the fistula repair, and minimally affects the donor extremity with mild numbness being the main side effect [16, 1921]. The gracilis muscle is a large muscle dependent on one main neurovascular bundle at its origin, which makes it versatile. All patients should undergo fecal diversion either prior to or occasionally at the time of graciloplasty. The creation of an ileostomy or colostomy should fa­cilitate healing by reducing fecal contamination. Maintenance of an indwelling Foley catheter and occasionally also a suprapubic catheter through­out the duration of treatment is mandatory. The objective is to prevent both urine and stool from entering the area of the repair.
The technical aspects of performing a gracilo­plasty have been well described [19]. The gracilis muscle is harvested from the patient in the Lloyd­Davies position. A 3–4-cm incision is first made in the distal medial thigh, staying posterior to the saphenous vein. Dissection is carried down onto the gracilis muscle after which its tendon is en­circled with either a red rubber catheter or a pen­rose drain. A second small incision is then made on the proximal thigh about four fingerbreadths distal to the pubic tubercle where the gracilis muscle is again identified and encircled. The sur­geon then bluntly dissects through the space su­perficial to the gracilis muscle to create a tunnel connecting both incisions. The gracilis tendon is then divided from behind the medial condyle after which a laparoscopic energy device is used to circumferentially mobilize the muscle up to its neurovascular bundle 10
cm from the
pubic tu­bercle. Throughout this procedure, it is important for the anesthesia team to avoid any paralytics so that the location of the neurovascular pedicle
Fig. 35.3 The patient is in the prone jackknife position. The gracilis muscle is grasped and about to be pulled into the perineal incision
can be confirmed by stimulating the nerve. A tunnel is then created from the upper thigh inci­sion to the site of the planned perineal incision. The thigh incisions are closed over a drain. The patient is then routinely repositioned into the prone jackknife position to optimize exposure. A 5-cm circumanal perineal incision is then made through the perineal body and carried proximally at least 2
cm above the fistula in healthy
tissue. The edges of the fistula tract are then resected. While the rectal defect is always closed with an advancement flap, the urethral defect is almost always left open depending on the fistula size and on the condition of the surrounding tissues; very small urethral defects surrounded by healthy pliable tissue may occasionally be primarily re­paired. A series of bilateral 2.0 prolene sutures are placed from the apex to the distal aspect of the dissected space, after which the sutures are passed through the gracilis muscle, interposing it between the rectum and urethra (Figs.
35.4
and 35.5). A closed suction drain is also left
35.3,
under the perineal incision. Later, the patient is placed in an adduction splint prior to reversal of general anesthesia.
Postoperatively, the patient is on bed rest with
an adductor splint for 3
days, intravenous antibi­otics for 3 days after which oral antibiotics are started, and a bladder catheter
for 6–8
weeks. Successful fistula closure is verified 6 weeks following surgery with a water
-soluble contrast
enema, a retrograde urethrogram, cystoscopy,
376 N. M. Salehomoum and S. D. Wexner
Fig. 35.4 The gracilis muscle after being pulled through the perineal incision. (With permission from Zmora et al. [15] © by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins)
and examination under anesthesia. Stoma clo­sure is generally performed 12 weeks after the surgery, at which time the Foley catheter is also removed.
We reviewed our results with gracilis interpo­sition flaps for rectourethral, rectovaginal, and pouch-vaginal fistulas [16]. Our results included 53 patients from 1995 to 2007 including 36 males with a rectourethral fistula and 17 females, 15 of whom had a rectovaginal fistula. Thirty of the 36 males had undergone treatment for prostate car­cinoma. Five males required a second gracilis in­terposition flap for the following reasons: failure after an initial gracilis flap, intraoperative muscle necrosis, perineal sepsis requiring debridement, and persistent fistula. Only one of those males had a persistent fistula after two gracilis flaps; however, he eventually healed his fistula after a transanal rectal advancement flap. There were 23 complications in 17 patients: perineal wound infection, urethral stricture, prolonged perineal wound drainage, fever, urinary retention, urinary tract infection, perineal bleeding, penile cellulitis, deep venous thrombosis, thigh hematoma, thigh pain/numbness, and fecal incontinence following stoma reversal. Thus, our success rates were 78 % after initial graciloplasty and 97 % after secondary procedures. Table 35.1 includes a review of the success rates with graciloplasty in treating recto­urethral fistulas.
Fig. 35.5 The gracilis muscle being interposed between the rectum and urethra. (With permission from:Zmora
al. [15] © by Lippincott
et
Williams & Wilkins)
Transanal techniques involve a full-thickness rectal advancement flap beyond the area of the fistula with simultaneous ligation of the fistula tract. Visualization for more proximal rectoure­thral fistulas has been augmented with the avail­ability of transanal endoscopic surgery (TES). Transanal endoscopic surgery includes transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) during which a large rigid anoscope is placed in the anus with subsequent insufflation of the rectum to allow visualization. Other variations of TES include placing a single-incision laparoscopic gel port into the anus with subsequent insufflation. The TES platforms present much improved visualiza­tion than standard transanal surgery. Full-thick­ness rectal advancement flaps with ligation of the fistula have been reported using TEM [22, 23]. A urethral stent may also be placed to span the fistula opening without primary closure of the urethral end with success [22].
A transsphincteric approach most commonly involves a posterior, or York-Mason, incision ex­tending from the anal verge to the coccyx with division of the sphincter muscles as well as the posterior rectal wall [2428]. The fistula tracts may then be either excised or ligated. This proce­dure has the risk of rectocutaneous or anocutane­ous fistula and fecal incontinence and may not be the best option in patients at risk for poor wound healing.
Table 35.1  Review of gracilis interposition for repair of rectourethral fistula
Study Year Patients with
Samalavicius et al. [31] 2012 1 Netsch et al. [32] 201 Samplaski et al. [33] 201 Gonzalez-Contreras [34] 201 Vanni et al. [35 Ulrich et Gupta et al. [37] 2008 15 0 (0) 100 100 Wexner et al. [16] 2008 36 18 (50) 78 97 Rabau et al. [38] 2006 4 0 (0) 75–100 Bukowski et al. [39] 1995 1 0 (0) 0 100
RUF rectourethral fistula
a
Exact success rate could not be determined. These papers evaluated both rectourethral and rectovaginal fistulas, but
it is unclear to which group the persistent fistula(s) belong.
] 2010 68 36 (53) 87 100
al. [36] 2009
gracilis interposi­tion for RUF, n
1 1 1 13 1 1
26 14 (54) >
Irradiated patients,n (%)
1 (100) 100 100 0 (0) 100 100 7 (54) 92 100 1(100) 100 100
Success rate after initial gracilis inter­position (%)
a
94
Final success rate (either repeat graci­lis interposition or other fistula repair) (%)
> 94
a
75–100
a
a
37735 Prostatic Urethral Injury
A transabdominal approach will allow re­pair of a rectourethral fistula if a proctectomy or prostatectomy is attempted [29, 30]. Open or laparoscopic approaches may be undertaken. Most transabdominal approaches described in the literature refer to radiotherapy-induced rectoure­thral fistulas rather than postoperative iatrogenic rectourethral fistulas.
This brief description of rectourethral fistula repairs sheds light to the numerous techniques that exist. It is important to individualize treat­ment options depending on the patient’s comor­bidities, expectations, and quality of life, in addi­tion to the anatomic details of the fistula.
Conclusion
Prostatic urethral injury is a major risk of pelvic colorectal surgery, especially when involving reoperative surgery, irradiated tissue, bulky tu­mors, and obese males. Avoiding urethral injury requires a high awareness of the risk as well as prophylactic measures to try to reduce the risk. Such techniques include the use of a large ure­thral catheter or sound to palpate the urethra. Suspicion for injury can be intraoperatively tested with retrograde instillation of indigo car­mine, methylene blue, and/or a retrograde ure­throgram. Furthermore, retrograde urethography
remains important both during and after surgery to diagnose the injury. In the unfortunate event of a prostatic urethral injury, a urology consult is highly recommended at the time of diagnosis for optimal management. A delayed rectourethral fistula may be treated by either a transperineal approach with a gracilis or dartos interposition flap or a transanal approach with a full-thickness rectal advancement flap.
Key Points on Avoiding Complications
1. Always be aware of the possibility of urinary injuries.
2. Be especially vigilant in cases of bulky tumors or history of pelvic irradiation.
3. Use a large Foley catheter to palpate the ure­thra.
4. Insert a urethral sound to palpate the urethra.
5. If concerned about a urinary injury, check prior to leaving the operating room.
Key Points on Diagnosing/Managing Prostatic Urethral Injuries
1. Inject methylene blue or indigo carmine either intravenously or retrograde through the ure­thra to check for a urethral injury.
378 N. M. Salehomoum and S. D. Wexner
12.
2. If a urethral injury is diagnosed intraopera­tively, aim to repair the injury at the initial surgery.
3. Obtain a urology consult at time of diagnosing a urinary injury.
4. Retrograde urethrography will best diagnose a urethral injury either intraoperatively or post­operatively.
5.
With any urinary injury, the urine should be
diverted with either a Foley catheter or a su­prapubic catheter until the injury has healed.
References
1. Delacroix SE Jr, Winters JC. Urinary tract injuries:
recognition and management. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2010;23(3):221.
2. Morey AF, Metro MJ, Carney KJ, Miller KS,
McAninch JW. Consensus on genitourinary trauma: external genitalia. BJU Int. 2004;94(4):507–15.
3. Rosenstein DI, Alsika
sication of urethral injuries. Urol Clin North Am.
2006;33(1):73–85, vi–vii.
4. Crane C, Cornejo A, Lyons R, Alter GJ. Urethral
reconstruction using a prefabricated pedicled gracilis
ap. Ann Plast Surg. 2013;70(6):691–3.
5. Myers JB, McAninch JW. Management of posterior
urethral disruption injuries. Nature clinical practice. Urology. 2009;6(3):154–63.
6. Koraitim MM. Pelvic fracture urethral injuries: eval-
uation of various methods of management. J Urol. 1996;156(4):1288–91.
7. Webster GD, Mathes GL, Selli C. Prostatomembra-
nous urethral injuries: a review of the literature a rational approach to their management. J Urol. 1983;130(5):898–902.
8. Elliott DS, Barrett DM. Long-term followup and
evaluation of primary realignment of posterior ure­thral disruptions. J Urol. 1997;157(3):814–6.
9. Asci R, Sarikaya S, Buyukalpelli R, Saylik A,
Yilmaz AF, Yildiz S. Voiding and sexual dysfunc­tions after pelvic fracture urethral injuries treated with either initial cystostomy and delayed urethro­plasty or immediate primary urethral realignment. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1999;33(4):228–33.
10. Mouraviev VB, Coburn M, Santucci RA. The treat-
ment of posterior urethral disruption associated with pelvic fractures: comparative experience of early realignment versus delayed urethroplasty. J Urol. 2005;173(3):873–6.
11. Fu Q, Zhang J, Sa YL, Jin SB, Xu YM. Recurrence
and complications after transperineal bulboprostatic anastomosis for posterior urethral strictures result­ing from pelvic fracture: a retrospective study from a urethral referral centre. BJU Int. 2013;112(4): E358–63.
NF. Diagnosis and clas-
and
Cooperberg MR,
SP. Urethral reconstruction for traumatic posterior urethral disruption: outcomes of a 25-year experi­ence. J Urol. 2007;178(5):2006–10. Discussion 10.
13. Morey AF, McAninch JW. Reconstruction of trau­matic posterior urethral strictures. Tech Urol. 1997;3(2):103–7.
Hechenbleikner EM, Buckley JC, W
14.
rectourethral stulas in adults: a systematic review of
surgical repair techniques and outcomes. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013;56(3):374–83.
Zmora O, Potenti FM,
15. Efron JE, Nogueras JJ, et
for iatrogenic rectourethral stula. Ann Surg.
sition
2003;237(4):483–7.
Wexner SD, Ruiz DE, Genua J, Nogueras JJ, Weiss
16. EG, Zmora O. Gracilis muscle interposition for the treatment of rectourethral, rectovaginal, and pouch-
vaginal stulas: results in 53 patients. Ann Surg.
2008;248(1):39–43.
17. Yamazaki Y, Yago R, Toma H. Dartos ap interposi­tion in the surgical repair of rectourethral stulas. Int
J Urol. 2001;8(10):564–7.
18. Varma MG, W AA, McAninch JW, Goldberg SM. Dartos muscle
interposition ap for the treatment of rectourethral stulas. Dis Colon Rectum. 2007;50(11):1849–55.
19.
Ruiz D, Bashankaev B, Speranza J, W
Graciloplasty for rectourethral, rectovaginal and rec-
tovesical stulas: technique overview, pitfalls and
complications. Tech Coloproctol. 2008;12(3):277–
81. Discussion 81–2.
20. Rius J, Nessim A, Nogueras JJ, Wexner SD. Graci-
lis transposition in complicated perianal stula and
unhealed perineal wounds in Crohn’s disease. Eur J Surg. 2000;166(3):218–22.
21. Ghoniem G, Elmissiry M, Weiss E, Langford C, Abdelwahab H, Wexner S. Transperineal repair of
complex rectourethral stula using gracilis muscle ap interposition–can urinary and bowel functions be
preserved? J Urol. 2008;179(5):1882–6.
22. Pigalarga R, Patel NM, Rezac C. Transanal endo­scopic microsurgery-assisted rectal advance-
ment ap is a viable option for iatrogenic rectourethral stula repair: a case report. Tech Colo-
proctol. 2011;15(2):209–11.
23. Bochove-Overgaauw DM, Beerlage HP, Bosscha K, Gelderman WA. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery
for correction of rectourethral stulae. J Endourol.
2006;20(12):1087–90.
24. Crippa A, Dall’oglio Antunes AA, Srougi M. The York-Mason technique for
recto-urethral stulas. Clinics. 2007;62(6):699–704.
25.
Renschler TD, Middleton RG. 30 years of experience
with York-Mason repair of recto-urinary stulas. J
Urol. 2003;170(4 Pt 1):1222–5. Discussion 5.
Rouanne M, V
26.
E, Roupret M. Outcome of a modied York Mason technique in men with iatrogenic urethrorectal s-
tula after radical prostatectomy. Dis Colon Rectum. 2011;54(8):1008–13.
McAninch JW, Alsika NF, Elliott
ick EC. Acquired
Wexner SD, Pikarsky AJ,
al. Gracilis muscle transpo-
ang JY, Garcia-Aguilar J, Shelton
exner SD.
MF, Nesrallah LJ, Hasegawa E,
aessen C, Bitker MO, Chartier-Kastler