{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,1]],"date-time":"2026-04-01T01:04:17Z","timestamp":1775005457931,"version":"3.50.1"},"reference-count":30,"publisher":"PAGEPress Publications","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,4]],"date-time":"2026-03-04T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1772582400000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by-nc\/4.0"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Arch Ital Urol Androl"],"abstract":"<jats:p>Background: Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (LU) is a standard intervention for large proximal ureteral stones. A significant technical consideration is whether to suture the ureterotomy site or utilize a sutureless approach to potentially minimize operative time and surgical morbidity. This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes and safety profiles of sutureless vs conventional sutured transperitoneal LU.Methods: We conducted a retrospective comparative study of 60 patients with proximal ureteral stones &gt;15 mm who underwent transperitoneal LU between January 2023 and March 2025. Patients were divided into two groups: a sutured group (n=30), where the ureterotomy was closed with interrupted sutures, and a sutureless group (n=30), where the site was left unsutured over a Double-J stent. Primary and secondary outcomes included operative time, urinary leakage volume (measured via drain output), hospital stay, and postoperative renal function.Results: Baseline demographics and stone characteristics were comparable between the groups. The sutureless technique was associated with a significantly shorter mean operative time (2.2\u00b10.3 h vs 2.7\u00b10.4 h; p&lt;0.001). While the duration of ureteral stenting was statistically longer in the sutureless group (17.7\u00b14.4 days vs 16.1\u00b15.2 days; p=0.050), this difference was clinically marginal. There were no significant differences in the volume of postoperative urinary leakage (p=0.066), hospital stay, or changes in serum creatinine and hemoglobin levels. No cases of urinoma or ureteral stricture were observed in either cohort during the early follow-up period.Conclusions: The sutureless technique for laparoscopic ureterolithotomy is a safe and efficient alternative that significantly reduces operative time without increasing the risk of major complications. Although it involves a statistically longer stenting period, the overall clinical outcomes are comparable to the sutured technique. The choice of approach should be individualized based on surgeon expertise and patient-specific anatomical factors.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.4081\/aiua.2026.14794","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,4]],"date-time":"2026-03-04T13:20:39Z","timestamp":1772630439000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["A comparative study of sutureless &lt;i&gt;versus&lt;\/i&gt; sutured transperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for large proximal ureteral stones: efficacy, safety, and perioperative outcomes"],"prefix":"10.4081","volume":"98","author":[{"given":"Seyed Ali","family":"Eslahi","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-8007-1452","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Seyed Hossein","family":"Hosseini","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Iman","family":"Shamohammadi","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Ali","family":"Akbarian","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Ali","family":"Adib","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Mazen","family":"Karama","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Urology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Aden University"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Faisal","family":"Ahmed","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Ibb University"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"2549","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,4]]},"reference":[{"key":"217253","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"1. Zhang L, Zhang X, Pu Y, et al. Global, regional, and national burden of urolithiasis from 1990 to 2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Clin Epidemiol. 2022;14:971-83.","DOI":"10.2147\/CLEP.S370591"},{"key":"217254","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"2. Bai Y, Tang Y, Deng L, et al. Management of large renal stones: laparoscopic pyelolithotomy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy. BMC Urol. 2017; 17:75.","DOI":"10.1186\/s12894-017-0266-7"},{"key":"217255","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"3. Zahirian Moghadam T, Pourfarzi F, Mohseni Rad H, Zandian H. Kidney stones among Iranian adults: Prevalence and socioeconomic inequality assessment in a cohort-based cross-sectional study. Health Sci Rep. 2022; 5:e877.","DOI":"10.1002\/hsr2.877"},{"key":"217256","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"4. Parks JH, Coe FL. The financial effects of kidney stone prevention. Kidney Int. 1996; 50:1706-12.","DOI":"10.1038\/ki.1996.489"},{"key":"217257","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"5. Meria P, Milcent S, Desgrandchamps F, et al. Management of pelvic stones larger than 20 mm: laparoscopic transperitoneal pyelolithotomy or percutaneous nephrolithotomy? Urol Int. 2005;75:322-6.","DOI":"10.1159\/000089167"},{"key":"217258","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"6. Tena Gonz\u00e1lez M\u00e9ndez G, Garc\u00eda-Escobar JC, Jim\u00e9nez-Cisneros E, et al. The role of laparoscopic surgery in the management of urinary lithiasis in the era of endourology in Mexico. Rev Mex Urolog 2024; 84:1-12.","DOI":"10.48193\/zc2x9531"},{"key":"217259","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"7. Simforoosh N, Aminsharifi A. Laparoscopic management in stone disease. Curr Opin Urol. 2013; 23:169-74.","DOI":"10.1097\/MOU.0b013e32835d307f"},{"key":"217260","unstructured":"8. Bayar G, Tanriverdi O, Taskiran M, et al. Comparison of laparoscopic and open ureterolithotomy in impacted and very large ureteral stones. Urol J. 2014; 11:1423-8."},{"key":"217261","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"9. Kijvikai K. The role of laparoscopic surgery for renal calculi management. Ther Adv Urol. 2011; 3:13-8.","DOI":"10.1177\/1756287211398254"},{"key":"217262","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"10. Al-Hunayan A, Abdulhalim H, El-Bakry E, et al. Laparoscopic pyelolithotomy: is the retroperitoneal route a better approach? Int J Urol. 2009; 16:181-6.","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1442-2042.2008.02210.x"},{"key":"217263","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"11. Zhang F, Gao S, Zhao Y, et al. Comparison of sutureless and conventional laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a propensity score-matching analysis. Front Oncol. 2021; 11:649356.","DOI":"10.3389\/fonc.2021.649356"},{"key":"217264","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"12. Abdel Raheem A, Alowidah I, Hagras A, et al. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for large proximal ureteric stones: Surgical technique, outcomes and literature review. Asian J Endosc Surg. 2021;14:241-9.","DOI":"10.1111\/ases.12861"},{"key":"217265","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"13. Singh V, Sinha RJ, Gupta DK, et al. Transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: a prospective randomized comparison study. J Urol. 2013;189:940-5.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.juro.2012.09.114"},{"key":"217266","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"14. Hu H, Xu L, Wang S, et al. Ureteral stricture formation after removal of proximal ureteral stone: retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy versus ureteroscopy with holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy. PeerJ. 2017; 5:e3483.","DOI":"10.7717\/peerj.3483"},{"key":"217267","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"15. Skrepetis K, Doumas K, Siafakas I, Lykourinas M. Laparoscopic versus open ureterolithotomy. A comparative study. Eur Urol. 2001;40:32-6.","DOI":"10.1159\/000049746"},{"key":"217268","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"16. Garg M, Singh V, Sinha RJ, et al. Prospective randomized comparison of open versus transperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: experience of a single center from Northern India. Curr Urol. 2013; 7:83-9.","DOI":"10.1159\/000356254"},{"key":"217269","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"17. Khalil M, Omar R, Abdel-Baky S, Mohey A, Sebaey A. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy; which is better: Transperitoneal or retroperitoneal approach? Turk J Urol. 2015; 41:185-90.","DOI":"10.5152\/tud.2015.03442"},{"key":"217270","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"18. Bove P, Micali S, Miano R, et al. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: a comparison between the transperitoneal and the retroperitoneal approach during the learning curve. J Endourol. 2009; 23:953-7.","DOI":"10.1089\/end.2008.0055"},{"key":"217271","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"19. Al-Sayyad A. Laparoscopic transperitoneal ureterolithotomy for large ureteric stones. Urol Ann. 2012; 4:34-7.","DOI":"10.4103\/0974-7796.91619"},{"key":"217272","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"20. Keeley FX, Gialas I, Pillai M, et al. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: the Edinburgh experience. BJU Int. 1999; 84:765-9.","DOI":"10.1046\/j.1464-410x.1999.00287.x"},{"key":"217273","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"21. Nouira Y, Kallel Y, Binous MY, et al. Laparoscopic retroperitoneal ureterolithotomy: initial experience and review of literature. J Endourol. 2004; 18:557-61.","DOI":"10.1089\/end.2004.18.557"},{"key":"217274","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"22. Feyaerts A, Rietbergen J, Navarra S, et al. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for ureteral calculi. Eur Urol. 2001; 40:609-13.","DOI":"10.1159\/000049845"},{"key":"217275","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"23. El-Moula MG, Abdallah A, El-Anany F, et al. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: our experience with 74 cases. Int J Urol. 2008;15:593-7.","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1442-2042.2008.02065.x"},{"key":"217276","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"24. Sahin S, Aras B, Eksi M, et al. Laparoscopic Ureterolithotomy. JSLS 2016;20:e2016.00004.","DOI":"10.4293\/JSLS.2016.00004"},{"key":"217277","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"25. Ramalingam M, Murugesan A, Senthil K, Pai MG. A comparison of continuous and interrupted suturing in laparoscopic pyeloplasty. JSLS. 2014; 18:294-300.","DOI":"10.4293\/108680813X13753907291873"},{"key":"217278","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"26. Tonyali S, Yilmaz M, Tzelves L, et al. Predictors of ureteral strictures after retrograde ureteroscopic treatment of impacted ureteral stones: a systematic literature review. J Clin Med. 2023;12:3603.","DOI":"10.3390\/jcm12103603"},{"key":"217279","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"27. Aminsharifi A, Hosseini MM, Khakbaz A. Laparoscopic pyelolithotomy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy for a solitary renal pelvis stone larger than 3 cm: a prospective cohort study. Urolithiasis. 2013; 41:493-7.","DOI":"10.1007\/s00240-013-0589-0"},{"key":"217280","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"28. Darwish AE, Gadelmoula MM, Abdelkawi IF, et al. Ureteral stricture after ureteroscopy for stones: A prospective study for the incidence and risk factors. Urol Ann. 2019; 11:276-81.","DOI":"10.4103\/UA.UA_110_18"},{"key":"217281","unstructured":"29. Basiri A, Tabibi A, Nouralizadeh A, et al. Comparison of safety and efficacy of laparoscopic pyelolithotomy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with renal pelvic stones: a randomizedclinical trial. Urol J. 2014; 11:1932-7."},{"key":"217282","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"30. Wang X, Li S, Liu T, et al. Laparoscopic pyelolithotomy compared to percutaneous nephrolithotomy as surgical management for large renal pelvic calculi: a meta-analysis. J Urol. 2013; 190:888-93.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.juro.2013.02.092"}],"container-title":["Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia"],"original-title":[],"link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.pagepressjournals.org\/aiua\/article\/download\/14794\/13875","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/www.pagepressjournals.org\/aiua\/article\/download\/14794\/13875","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,1]],"date-time":"2026-04-01T00:01:50Z","timestamp":1775001710000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.pagepressjournals.org\/aiua\/article\/view\/14794"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,4]]},"references-count":30,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,31]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.4081\/aiua.2026.14794","relation":{},"ISSN":["2282-4197","1124-3562"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2282-4197","type":"electronic"},{"value":"1124-3562","type":"print"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,4]]}}}