Effectiveness of primary endoscopic incision of ureteroceles

Endoscopic incision of a ureterocele (EIU) is simple when compared to an open procedure such as ureterocele excision with or without an upper-pole nephrectomy. It has, however, the potential to induce vesicoureteric reflux (VUR), which traditionally requires further surgical intervention. The natural history of the VUR that develops following EIU is not known. We have treated asymptomatic VUR that developed following EIU conservatively and have surgically intervened only in cases with recurrent urinary tract infections (UTI). This is a review from a single surgeon's practice involving 29 consecutive cases of ureterocele spread over a period of 4 years. The range of follow up was 4-54 months (median 32). Of the 24 children who underwent primary EIU, 6 required a second procedure, 3 a reincision and 3 an open procedure. Of the 3 who had a reincision, 2 required a further open procedure. The indication for reincision was failure of decompression of the upper tract and the indication for an open procedure was recurrent UTI following EIU. Thus, overall success was achieved in 19 of 24 cases of primary EIU (79.2%). VUR following EIU appeared in 10 cases (41%); UTI developed in only 5 (50%) of these 10 cases. Overall, UTI developed in 6 of the 24 (25%) cases of primary EIU. Eight children had an open procedure (3 as a primary procedure and 5 after EIU); 2 (25%) from this group had UTI following the procedure, and interestingly, neither had VUR. Ureterocele incision is thus a good alternative to upper-pole nephrectomy or excision of the ureterocele, especially in infancy. There is an inherent risk of producing VUR in the postincision period, however, the majority of cases can be managed conservatively. All patients need to be monitored for hypertension and UTI following EIU.