The use of endoluminal ultrasonography for preventing significant bleeding during endopyelotomy: evaluation of helical computed tomography vs endoluminal ultrasonography for detecting crossing vessels

OBJECTIVE To evaluate, in a prospective study, the efficiency of helical computed tomography (CT) and endoluminal ultrasonography (ELUS) for detecting significant crossing vessels, a major cause of bleeding complications when treating patients with pelvi‐ureteric junction (PUJ) obstruction, and to compare our results using ELUS with those of an earlier multicentre study (not using ELUS), to see whether the complication rate decreased. PATIENTS AND METHODS The study included 27 patients with a PUJ who had isotope renography, intravenous urography, helical CT and ELUS before surgery. Depending on the findings of ELUS, patients were treated with a pure lateral AcuciseTM incision (Applied Medical, Irvine, CA, USA) an Acucise with changed cutting direction, or (later) a laparoscopic pyeloplasty. RESULTS ELUS detected 15% more crossing vessels than helical CT; 16 patients had Acucise (seven lateral, nine other cutting direction), eight were treated with a laparoscopic pyeloplasty and three with other procedures. By contrast with earlier reports and as a consequence of using ELUS, there was no bleeding, vs 16% in the study not using ELUS. The success rate of 73% of the endourological approach is comparable with previous reports. CONCLUSION ELUS is more sensitive in detecting relevant crossing vessels than helical CT and therefore the use of ELUS can better prevent bleeding complications. ELUS can also improve the success rate by helping in selecting the correct treatment. Because it is minimally invasive and safe, ELUS combined with Acucise (or other possible endourological techniques, like holmium laser incision) should be the first choice of treatment for PUJ stenosis.