PDF herunterladen
Eur J Pediatr Surg
DOI: 10.1055/a-2507-8135
Original Article

Feasibility and Challenges of Pyeloureteral Magnetic Anastomosis Device in Domestic Pigs: A Stepwise Approach with Extended Observation

Rainer Kubiak
1   Department of Pediatric Surgery, Children's Hospital of Eastern Switzerland, Sankt Gallen, Switzerland
,
Zita Hornok
2   Department of Pediatric Surgery, Hungarian Reformed Church Bethesda Children's Hospital, Budapest, Hungary
,
Domokos Csukas
3   Surgical Research and Techniques, Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
,
Andrea Ferencz
3   Surgical Research and Techniques, Heart and Vascular Center, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
,
Tamas Cserni
4   Department of Pediatric Urology, Manchester Children's Hospitals, Manchester, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
› Institutsangaben Fundings This study was supported by a grant from the Kidneys For Life Charity, Manchester (Charity number 505256).
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Objective The pyeloureteral anastomosis remains the most challenging part of pyeloplasty. A purpose-built anastomotic device could simplify this step and potentially improve outcomes. The concept of a pyeloureteral magnetic anastomosis device (PUMA) was proven in minipigs, but only in short term. Our aim was to test the PUMA in domestic pigs and achieve a prolonged follow-up period.

Methods Five female domestic pigs underwent laparoscopy and ligation of the left ureter. Four weeks later, laparoscopic implantation of the PUMA was planned. Removal of the device and a retrograde contrast study were scheduled after another 4 weeks. The experiment was terminated when the animals could no longer be properly cared for due to their weight.

Results Due to unexpected smaller ureteric diameters, a modified PUMA could only be successfully inserted in pig number 3 (49 kg). Four weeks later, the device was found to be dislocated, but the anastomosis remained patent. After modifying the study protocol, the PUMA was successfully implanted in pigs number 4 (96 kg) and 5 (68 kg) 8 weeks after ureteric ligation. Pig 4 developed malignant hyperthermia and died. In pig 5, the magnets were removed 4 weeks later. After an additional 8 weeks, the animal reached 135 kg and was terminated. The anastomosis remained patent and preserved its diameter.

Conclusion Despite limitations, our study successfully demonstrated that the PUMA can achieve a patent ureteric anastomosis in domestic pigs. This suggests a potential for minimally invasive ureteric anastomosis in clinical settings. Further research is needed to optimize the technique and validate its effectiveness in humans.

Keywords

laparoscopy - magnamosis - surgical innovation - PUMA device - pyeloplasty

Authors' Contribution

R.K. collected the data (animal laboratory), participated in data analysis and interpretation, and wrote the manuscript. Z.H. participated in data collection (animal laboratory) and data analysis. D.C. participated in data collection (animal laboratory) and data analysis. A.F. participated in data collection (animal laboratory) and data analysis. T.C. designed the study, collected the data (animal laboratory), and participated in data analysis and interpretation. All authors have approved the final manuscript.




Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 30. Mai 2024

Angenommen: 22. Dezember 2024

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
20. Januar 2025

© 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Pérez-Marchán M, Pérez-Brayfield M. Comparison of laparoscopic pyeloplasty vs. robot-assisted pyeloplasty for the management of ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children. Front Pediatr 2022; 10 (10) 1038454
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 Silay MS, Spinoit AF, Undre S. et al. Global minimally invasive pyeloplasty study in children: results from the Pediatric Urology Expert Group of the European Association of Urology Young Academic Urologists working party. J Pediatr Urol 2016; 12 (04) 229.e1-229.e7
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 3 Blanc T, Abbo O, Vatta F. et al. Transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children. A multicentre, prospective study. Eur Urol Open Sci 2022; 41: 134-140
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 4 Esposito C, Masieri L, Castagnetti M. et al. Robot-assisted vs laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children with uretero-pelvic junction obstruction (UPJO): technical considerations and results. J Pediatr Urol 2019; 15 (06) 667.e1-667.e8
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 Doublet JD, Janetschek G, Joyce A, Mandressi A, Rassweiller J, Tolley D. The difficulty scoring system of laparoscopic procedures. In: European Association of Urology Guidelines on Laparoscopy; pp14–16. Accessed May 10, 2024 at: https://d56bochluxqnz.cloudfront.net/media/laparoscopy.pdf
  • 6 Echeverria P, Reed L F, Gatti JM. et al. Latitudes and attitudes: a multinational study of laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children. J Pediatr Urol 2023; 19 (01) 86.e1-86.e6
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 7 Langreen S, Ludwikowski B, Dingemann J, Ure BM, Hofmann AD, Kuebler JF. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty in neonates and infants is safe and efficient. Front Pediatr 2024; 12: 1397614
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Jamshidi R, Stephenson JT, Clay JG, Pichakron KO, Harrison MR. Magnamosis: magnetic compression anastomosis with comparison to suture and staple techniques. J Pediatr Surg 2009; 44 (01) 222-228
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 9 Graves CE, Co C, Hsi RS. et al. Magnetic compression anastomosis (Magnamosis): first-in-human trial. J Am Coll Surg 2017; 225 (05) 676-681.e1
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Kotlovsky AM, Muensterer OJ, Nikolaev VV, Razumovskiy AY. Magnetic compression anastomosis-past experience and current proposals for further development in pediatric minimally invasive surgery. Children (Basel) 2023; 10 (08) 1328
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 11 Cserni T, Urban D, Hajnal D. et al. Pyeloureteric magnetic anastomosis device to simplify laparoscopic pyeloplasty: a proof-of-concept study. BJU Int 2021; 127 (04) 409-411
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 12 Hornok Z, Ferencz A, Kubiak R, Cserni T. Cheap and clean dry balloon training model for laparoscopic pyeloplasty. J Pediatr Urol 2023; 19 (04) 471-473
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 13 MacArthur Clark J. The 3Rs in research: a contemporary approach to replacement, reduction and refinement. Br J Nutr 2018; 120 (s1): S1-S7
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 14 Bowen J, Cranley J, Gough D. The flank approach to the porcine upper urinary tract: safe and reliable. Lab Anim 1995; 29 (02) 204-206
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 15 Hellström M, Hjälmås K, Jacobsson B, Jodal U, Odén A. Normal ureteral diameter in infancy and childhood. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh) 1985; 26 (04) 433-439
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 16 Radmayr C, Bogaert G, Burgu B. et al. European Association of Urology Guidelines on Paediatric Urology. 2022: 78 . Accessed August 10, 2024 at: https://d56bochluxqnz.cloudfront.net/documents/full-guideline/EAU-Guidelines-on-Paediatric-Urology-2022.pdf
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 17 Clavica F, Zhao X, ElMahdy M, Drake MJ, Zhang X, Carugo D. Investigating the flow dynamics in the obstructed and stented ureter by means of a biomimetic artificial model. PLoS One 2014; 9 (02) e87433
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 18 Liu X, Huang C, Guo Y, Yue Y, Hong J. Comparison of DJ stented, external stented and stent-less procedures for pediatric pyeloplasty: a network meta-analysis. Int J Surg 2019; 68: 126-133
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 19 Wolf Jr JS, Humphrey PA, Rayala HJ, Gardner SM, Mackey RB, Clayman RV. Comparative ureteral microanatomy. J Endourol 1996; 10 (06) 527-531
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 20 An Y, Zhang M, Xu S. et al. An experimental study of magnetic compression technique for ureterovesical anastomosis in rabbits. Sci Rep 2023; 13 (01) 1708
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 21 Shlomovitz E, Copping R, Swanstrom LL. Magnetic compression anastomosis for recanalization of complete ureteric occlusion after radical cystoprostatectomy. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2023; 34 (09) 1640-1641
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 22 Ünal E, Çiftçi TT, Akinci D. Magnetic compression anastomosis of benign short-segment ureteral obstruction. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2024; 35 (03) 398-403
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 23 Parra I, Rivas JG, Gutíerrez B. et al. Pyeloureteral anastomosis as a reconstructive technique for post-renal transplant ureteral stenosis. Urol Res Pract 2023; 49 (06) 406-412
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar