Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Viewpoint
  • Published:

The importance of crossing vessels in ureteropelvic junction obstruction

Nature Clinical Practice Urology volume 4, pages 232–233 (2007)Cite this article

A diagnosis of ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction implies a significant functional impairment of urinary transport from the renal pelvis to the ureter. UPJ obstruction does not represent a single anatomical entity, but rather a set of obstructive processes that result from multiple etiological factors. UPJ obstruction most often results from intrinsic disease. A frequently found defect is the presence of an aperistaltic segment of the ureter, which fails to propel urine from the renal pelvis to the ureter. Intrinsic obstruction at the ureteropelvic junction can also be caused by infoldings of the ureteral mucosa and musculature, or from true ureteral strictures. Other features extrinsic to the ureteral lumen, such as fibrous bands and crossing vessels, have also been implicated in the etiology of UPJ obstruction.

The use of endoscopic techniques for the treatment of UPJ obstruction has led to controversy over the role of crossing vessels in the etiology and management of UPJ obstruction.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Brooks JD et al. (1995) Comparison of open and endourologic approaches to the obstructed ureteropelvic junction. Urology 46: 791–795

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Motola JA et al. (1993) Results of 212 consecutive endopyelotomies: an 8-year follow-up. J Urol 149: 453–456

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Van Cangh PJ et al. (1994) Long term results and late recurrence after endoureteropyelotomy: a critical analysis of prognostic factors. J Urol 151: 934–937

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Gupta M et al. (1997) Open surgical exploration after failed endopyelotomy: a 12-year experience. J Urol 157: 1613–1619

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Knudsen BE et al. (2004) Percutaneous antegrade endopyelotomy: long-term results from one institution. Urology 63: 230–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ng CS et al. (2003) Management of failed primary intervention for ureteropelvic junction obstruction: 12-year single center experience. Urology 61: 291–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Varkarakis IM et al. (2004) Management of secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction after failed primary laparoscopic pyeloplasty. J Urol 172: 180–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Rehman J et al. (2001) Missed anterior crossing vessels during retroperitoneal pyeloplasty: a laparoscopic transperitoneal discovery and repair. J Urol 166: 593–596

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Sampaio FJ (1998) Vascular anatomy at the ureteropelvic junction. Urol Clin North Am 25: 251–258

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Nakada SY et al. (1998) Retrospective analysis of the effect of crossing vessels on successful retrograde endopyelotomy outcomes using CT angiography. J Urol 159: 62–65

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Bagley DH et al. (1995) Endopyelotomy: importance of crossing vessels demonstrated by endoluminal ultrasonography. J Endourol 9: 465–467

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IM Varkarakis is Lecturer of Urology and C Deliveliotis is Associate Professor of Urology in the Second Department of Urology at the School of Medicine, University of Athens, Greece.,

    Ioannis M Varkarakis & Charalambos Deliveliotis

Authors
  1. Ioannis M Varkarakis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Charalambos Deliveliotis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ioannis M Varkarakis.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Varkarakis, I., Deliveliotis, C. The importance of crossing vessels in ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Nat Rev Urol 4, 232–233 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpuro0801

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpuro0801

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing