Background: Currently, shock wave lithotripsy (SWL), ureteroscopy (URS) and HO:YAG laser are the first line of treatments for patients with ureterolithiasis requiring surgical management. At centers which don’t have access to expensive equipment needed in URS and SWL, Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy may be used as a primary procedure. The aim of this study is to share our experience of retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for proximal ureteric calculi and evaluate the safety and efficacy of this procedure.

Material and Methods: This prospective study was conducted from March 2011 to August 2017 at our centre. A total of 94 patients with proximal ureteric stone who accepted laparoscopic ureterolithotomy were enrolled in the study. The evaluation and assessment of all these patients was done on the OPD basis with reference to their indication and suitability for laparoscopic ureterolithotmy modality of treatment.

Results: The mean age was 37 years. There were 61(64.89%) males. The stones were located in the right side in 58(61.70%) patients. 66(70.21%) patients have upper ureteral stone and 28(29.78%) patients have middle ureteral stones. The average stone size was 14.5 mm. Various complications that occurred during the procedure were difficulty in ureter localization, bleeding, injury to peritoneum, stone migration, and urinary leakage. The mean operative time was 65 minute and the mean blood loss was 70.50 ml. Mean hospital stay was 2.1 days and the stone clearance was 92(97.87%).

Conclusion: Even though SWL and URS are considered to be the first-line treatment for ureteral stones, retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy is a very effective minimally invasive modality of treating ureteral calculi. Unlike URS this procedure can give 100% stone clearance in one session. Although its role as a salvage procedure for failed ESWL, and ureteroscopy is undisputed, in selected patients with large chronically impacted ureteric stones, it may be considered the first line of treatment.

Keywords: Uteric calculus, Retro-peritoneal laparoscpy, ureterolithotomy

1. Qingfeng H, Weihong D, Yuancheng G, Yatfaat H, Ke X, et al. (2014) Retroperitoneal Laparoscopic Ureterol-thotomy for Proximal Ureteral Calculi in Selected Patients. Sientific World Journal 687876:1-8.
2. Preminger GM, Tiselius HG, Assimos DG, et al. 2007 Guideline for the management of ureteral calculi. Eur Urol 2007;52: 1610-31.
3. Lopes Neto AC, Korkes F, et al. Prospective randomized study of treatment of large proximal ureteral stones: extraco-rporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus ureterolithotripsy versus laparoscopy. J Urol. 2012;187:164–168. [PubMed]
4. Park H, Park M, Park T. Two-year experience with ureteral stones: extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy v ureteroscopic manipulation. J Endourol. 1998; 12:501–504. [PubMed]
5. El-Moula MG, Abdallah A, El-Anany F, et al. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: our experience with 74 cases. Int J Urol. 2008;15:593–597. [PubMed]
6. Tefekli, A. Tepeler, T. Akman et al., “The comparison of laparoscopic pyelolit-hotomy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of solitary large renal pelvic stones,” Urological Research, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 549–555, 2012. 
7. Wickham JEA, editor. (ed). The surgical treatment of renal lithiasis. In: Urinary Calculus Disease. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1979:145–198.
8. Raboy A, Ferzli GS, Laffreda R, et al. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy. Urology. 1992;39:223–225.[PubMed]
9. Kijvikai K, Patcharatrakul S. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: its role and some controversial technical considerations. Int J Urol. 2006;13:206–210. [PubMed]
10. Turk C, Knoll T, Petrik A, et al. EAU guidelines on urolithiasis. Vienna, Austria: European Association of Urology; 2011.
11. K. Nigam, Rajesh. Laparoscopic stone surgery for renal and ureteric stones: an evaluation. International Surgery Journal 2016; 3(2): 821-824
12. Selcuk Sahin, Bekir Aras,Mithat Eksi et al. Laparoscopic Ureterolithotomy. Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. 2016; 20(1): 2016.00004.
13. Goel A, Hemal AK. Upper and mid-ureteric stones: a prospective unrandomized comparison of retroperito-neoscopic and open ureterolithotomy. BJU Int2001;88: 679-82.
14. Kane CJ, Bolton DM, Stoller ML. Current indications for open stone surgery in an endourology center. Urology 1995;45:218-21.
15. Gaur DD, Trivedi S, Prabhudesai MR, Madhusudhana HR, Gopichand M. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: technical considerations and long-term follow-up. BJU Int 2002;89:339-43.
16.  Harewood LM, Webb DR, Pope AJ. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: the results of an initial series, and an evaluation of its role in the management of uretericcalculi. Br J Urol 1994;74:170-6
17. Keeley FX, Gialas I, Pillai M, Chrisofos M, Tolley DA. Laparoscopic ureterolith-otomy: the Edinburgh experience. BJU Int 1999;84:765-9.
18. Mohamed Gad El-Moula, Adel Abdallah, Fathy El-Anany, Yaser Abdelsalam, Ahmad Abolyosr, Diaa Abdelhameed, et al. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: our experience with 74 cases. Int J Urol 2008;15:593-7
19. Wolf Jr JS. Treatment selection and outcomes: ureteral calculi. Urol Clin NorthAm 2007;34:421-30.
20. Flasko T, Holman E, Kovacs G, Tallai B, Toth C, Salah MA. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: the method of choice in selected cases. J Laparoendosc Adv SurgTech A 2005;15:149-52.
21. El-Feel A, Abouel-Fettouh H, Abdel-Hakim AM. Laparoscopic transperitoneal ureterolithotomy. J Endourol2007;21:50-4.
22. Hemal AK, Wadhwa SN, Kumar M, Gupta NP. Transperitoneal and retroperitoneal nephrectomy for giant hydronephrosis. J. Urol. 1999;162: 35-9.

Zahid Mohd Rather

Postal add: Married Hostel, opposite to SMHS causality,

room no. C18, karan Nagar Srinagar, pin 190010

Contact No: 09469784774, Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.