Spontaneous Ureteral Rupture: Is Immediate Surgical Intervention Always Necessary? Presentation of Four Cases and Review of the Literature

dc.contributor.author Akpınar, Haluk
dc.contributor.author Kural, Ali Riza
dc.contributor.author Tüfek, İlter
dc.contributor.author Öbek, Can
dc.contributor.author Demirkesen, Oktay
dc.contributor.author Solok, Vural
dc.contributor.author Gürtuğ, Adil
dc.date.accessioned 2019-06-27T08:01:02Z
dc.date.available 2019-06-27T08:01:02Z
dc.date.issued 2002
dc.description.abstract Purpose: We report our experience with spontaneous ureteral rupture (SUR) managed conservatively. Case Reports: Data on three men and one woman 53 to 89 years old (mean age 73) with SUR were retrospectively evaluated. The common complaint was sudden-onset abdominal and concomitant flank pain. On physical examination all patients had abdominal tenderness and pain with costovertebral angle tenderness on the associated side. One patient had rheumatoid arthritis treated with corticosteroids and one had carcinoma of the prostate. All patients had urinary extravasation on CT scans. Two patients had ureteral obstruction by stones and another had bladder outlet obstruction secondary to prostate cancer. Interestingly irrespective of the obstruction level the rupture was near the ureteropelvic junction in all patients. The symptoms regressed within hours after basket catheterization and ureteral stent placement in one patient and close follow-up and supportive treatment in three patients. In two patients disappearance of extravasation and reabsorption of perirenal fluid were confirmed by second- and third-day CT scans. The patients were followed for a mean of 17 (range 14-21) months without any problems. Conclusions: We believe that SUR cases are more frequent than reported. It is the authors' opinion that if the clinical scenario is suspected in the acute phase and investigated by appropriate radiologic techniques many more SUR cases will be diagnosed. Careful monitoring with supportive measures may be curative in the majority of the patients obviating a surgical intervention. en_US]
dc.identifier.citationcount 29
dc.identifier.doi 10.1089/089277902753716160 en_US
dc.identifier.endpage 183
dc.identifier.issn 0892-7790 en_US
dc.identifier.issn 0892-7790
dc.identifier.issue 3
dc.identifier.pmid 12028629 en_US
dc.identifier.scopus 2-s2.0-0036230977 en_US
dc.identifier.startpage 179 en_US
dc.identifier.uri https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12469/219
dc.identifier.uri https://doi.org/10.1089/089277902753716160
dc.identifier.volume 16 en_US
dc.identifier.wos WOS:000175133400008 en_US
dc.identifier.wosquality Q2
dc.institutionauthor Gürtuğ, Adil en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Mary Ann Liebert Inc Publ en_US
dc.relation.journal Journal of Endourology en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategory Makale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı en_US
dc.rights info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess en_US
dc.scopus.citedbyCount 30
dc.title Spontaneous Ureteral Rupture: Is Immediate Surgical Intervention Always Necessary? Presentation of Four Cases and Review of the Literature en_US
dc.type Article en_US
dc.wos.citedbyCount 31
dspace.entity.type Publication

Files