Skip to main content

Endoscopy — Cystoscopy & Ureteroscopy

Cystoscopy and ureteroscopy serve as indispensable diagnostic, therapeutic, and surveillance tools across virtually every domain of reconstructive urology — from preoperative planning and intraoperative quality assurance to postoperative surveillance and endoscopic management of complications. This article catalogs their roles organized by clinical context.

Part I: Cystoscopy in reconstructive surgery​

Role 1 — Intraoperative injury detection during pelvic reconstructive surgery​

The American Urogynecologic Society (AUGS) recommends universal cystoscopy at the time of all pelvic organ prolapse reconstructive operations, with the exception of operations solely for posterior compartment defects.[1][2] This is supported by several key findings:

  • Intraoperative cystoscopy detects unsuspected lower urinary tract injuries in approximately 4% of urogynecologic procedures, including ureteral ligation, intravesical sutures, and bladder perforation.[3]
  • Ureteral efflux must be confirmed bilaterally when cystoscopy is performed during pelvic reconstructive surgery. Multiple agents (indigo carmine, methylene blue, IV fluorescein, phenazopyridine) exist to aid visualization of ureteral jets.[1][2]
  • When injuries are identified and treated intraoperatively, there is decreased morbidity, lower healthcare costs, and lower litigation risk than delayed detection.[2]
  • Intraoperative ultrasound assessment of ureteral patency using power Doppler has been proposed as a non-invasive alternative, with cystoscopy reserved for abnormal or nondiagnostic sonographic findings.[4]

Role 2 — Cystoscopy-assisted techniques during ureteral reimplantation​

Cystoscopy plays a direct technical role during certain reimplantation procedures. Chung et al. described laparoscopic ureteroneocystostomy with psoas hitch using cystoscopy-assisted submucosal tunneling — cystoscopic injection of normal saline into the submucosal plane facilitates creation of the anti-reflux tunnel during minimally invasive reimplantation.[5]

However, routine cystoscopy before ureteral reimplantation for primary vesicoureteral reflux in children with adequate preoperative imaging yields little additional diagnostic information (only 0.7% unsuspected anomalies) and adds 16.2% to operating-room costs. It should be reserved for patients with suspicious or inadequate radiologic studies.[6]

Part II: Cystoscopy for postoperative surveillance​

Role 3 — Surveillance after urethroplasty​

Cystoscopy is the most specific modality for detecting stricture recurrence after urethroplasty and is a critical component of postoperative surveillance.[7][8]

The AUA Urethral Stricture Disease Guideline states that urethrocystoscopy, urethral ultrasound, or retrograde urethrography provides the most definitive confirmation of stricture recurrence.[7] Key evidence supporting cystoscopic surveillance:

  • Goonesinghe et al. prospectively followed 144 post-urethroplasty patients with flexible urethroscopy at 3, 6, and 12 months and annually thereafter. 96% of recurrences were detected within the first year. Seven of 11 patients with recurrence had flow rates >15 mL/s, meaning uroflowmetry alone would have missed them. Urethroscopy also identified two distinct morphologic recurrence patterns — diaphragms (treated with simple dilation) and restenosis (requiring revision) — that require different interventions.[9]
  • Amend et al. (TURNS multi-institutional study, 304 patients, median 64-month follow-up) demonstrated that early surveillance urethroscopy findings predict long-term outcomes: patients with small-caliber (<17 Fr) recurrences had a significantly higher rate of secondary intervention over long-term follow-up.[10]
  • Baradaran et al. (TURNS, 1054 patients) found that many patients with cystoscopic recurrence do not ultimately need intervention — only 33.8% of small-caliber recurrences and 6.2% of large-caliber recurrences required secondary procedures. Quality of life was not significantly different among groups, suggesting cystoscopy alone may be a poor screening test when defined by patient symptoms.[11]

Practice patterns: A survey of 142 Society of Genitourinary Reconstructive Surgeons (GURS) members found that 57.7% routinely perform cystoscopy postoperatively, typically at 2–6 months. Most surgeons (78.2%) prefer some form of objective investigation (uroflowmetry 82%, post-void residual 79.3%).[12] Routine VCUG at catheter removal may not be necessary — Calvo and Rourke demonstrated that omitting routine imaging after bulbar urethroplasty did not impact 90-day complications or stricture recurrence rates.[13]

Role 4 — Surveillance after bladder augmentation: malignancy screening​

The role of routine surveillance cystoscopy after augmentation cystoplasty remains controversial, with conflicting recommendations:[14][15][16][17]

Arguments for surveillance:

  • Malignancy risk after AC ranges from 0–5.5%, with a mean latency of 19–20 years. Adenocarcinoma is the most common type (51.6%), predominantly at the entero-urinary anastomosis.[15]
  • Soergel et al. reported 3 patients with TCC after AC for neuropathic bladder, all of whom died of metastatic disease, and recommended endoscopic surveillance beginning 10 years after surgery.[17]
  • Garnier et al. found that 13 of 16 patients with post-AC malignancy were diagnosed at advanced stage, with only 56% 1-year survival, underscoring the need for earlier detection.[18]
  • FISH (fluorescence in situ hybridization) has shown 100% sensitivity and 95% specificity for detecting malignancy after AC, potentially outperforming conventional cytology.[19]

Arguments against routine surveillance:

  • Hamid et al. prospectively evaluated 92 patients with enterocystoplasty (median follow-up 15 years): no cancer was identified with surveillance cystoscopy or routine biopsies. The only malignancy was diagnosed in a symptomatic patient who had previously had a normal surveillance cystoscopy.[14]
  • Higuchi et al. followed 65 patients on annual surveillance (cystoscopy + cytology) for a median of 15 years: no tumors were detected. Cytology specificity was only 90%, generating false positives. Due to low event rates and high cost, they recommended discontinuing routine surveillance after 5 years.[16]
  • Kokorowski et al. (decision analysis) found annual screening cystoscopy and cytology after AC in spina bifida patients had only an 11% chance of being cost-effective at a $100,000 / life-year threshold.[20]
  • Higuchi et al. (matched cohort) found no significant difference in bladder-cancer incidence between augmented patients and matched controls with congenital bladder dysfunction (4.6% vs. 2.6%, p=0.54).[21]

Current consensus: The AUA / SUFU guideline recommends annual follow-up with focused history, metabolic panel, and urinary tract imaging for all patients with bowel-incorporating reconstructions, but does not mandate routine surveillance cystoscopy in asymptomatic patients. Cystoscopy should be performed promptly for new hematuria, recurrent unexplained UTIs, or suprapubic pain.[22] Annual cystoscopy is more strongly recommended after gastrocystoplasty given the higher malignancy incidence.[23]

Role 5 — Cystoscopy for bladder neck contracture and VUAS​

Cystoscopy is both the diagnostic standard and the therapeutic platform for BNC and VUAS. The AUA defines VUAS as symptomatic obstruction with inability to pass a 17 Fr cystoscope.[7][24]

Cystoscopy serves as the vehicle for all endoscopic treatments:

  • Direct vision internal urethrotomy (DVIU) with cold knife or holmium laser.[25]
  • Balloon dilation of the stenotic segment.
  • Intralesional injection of mitomycin C (0.3–0.4 mg/mL) or triamcinolone at incision sites.[25][26]
  • Transurethral incision with transverse mucosal realignment — a novel cystoscopic technique using a laparoscopic suturing device transurethrally to bring healthy bladder mucosa across the defect (analogous to an endoscopic Y-V plasty), achieving 89% success after one procedure and 100% after two.[27]

Rozanski et al. demonstrated that DVIU with low-dose MMC achieved 90% overall success in nonradiated patients and 76% in radiated patients at median 21-month follow-up, with success defined as the ability to pass a 17 Fr cystoscope postoperatively.[26]

Part III: Ureteroscopy in reconstructive surgery​

Role 6 — Diagnostic evaluation of ureteral strictures​

Ureteroscopy provides direct visualization of ureteral strictures and is a critical adjunct to imaging in the preoperative assessment for ureteral reconstruction. The SIU / ICUD consultation recommends cystoscopy as the most specific procedure for urethral stricture diagnosis and notes its value in assessing the bladder neck and posterior urethra after pelvic fracture urethral injury.[8]

For ureteral strictures specifically, ureteroscopy allows:

  • Direct visualization of stricture morphology, length, and degree of obliteration.
  • Tissue biopsy to exclude malignancy (critical before any reconstructive procedure).
  • Assessment of mucosal quality proximal and distal to the stricture.
  • Guidewire passage to determine whether the stricture is traversable.

Role 7 — Endoscopic treatment of benign ureteral strictures​

Endoscopic management serves as a reasonable first-line treatment for select ureteral strictures, though reconstruction remains the gold standard for definitive management:[28][29][30]

TechniqueBest indicationSuccess rateKey considerations
Balloon dilationShort strictures (≤2 cm) with intact vascular supply, onset ≤3 months54–89% (long-term)Higher success for short, recent strictures; lower for post-radiation
Endoureterotomy (holmium laser)Short strictures with compromised vascular supply; recurrent UPJ stenosis62–85%Stricture length >2 cm predicts failure
Balloon dilation + endoureterotomyLower ureteral strictures87–90% at 1 yearCombined approach superior to dilation alone for distal strictures
Ureteric bypass (Allium stent)Patients unfit for reconstruction92% at 12 monthsEmerging technique; limited long-term data
[29][31][32][33][34][30]

Critical comparison with reconstruction: Ou et al. (142 patients) demonstrated that the overall success rate of endoscopic treatment was 51.6% vs. 95.7% for reconstruction (p<0.001).[28]

Endoscopic treatment is best suited as initial management for proximal or distal strictures ≤2 cm with mild-to-moderate hydronephrosis. Close follow-up is mandatory given the median recurrence time of 51 months.[28]

Role 8 — Endoscopic management of ureteroenteric anastomotic strictures​

Ureteroscopy plays a critical role in managing ureteroenteric anastomotic strictures (UEAS) — a complication occurring in 3–10% of patients after urinary diversion:[35][36][37][38]

Antegrade approach (via percutaneous nephrostomy tract) — the preferred endoscopic approach for UEAS. Katims et al. described a technique of antegrade flexible ureteroscopy with biopsy, followed by laser incision, triamcinolone injection, balloon dilation to 24 Fr, and parallel double-J stent placement, achieving 83.3% success at median 30-month follow-up.[35]

Retrograde approach (through the conduit or neobladder) — more challenging due to altered anatomy and absence of standard landmarks. Costamagna et al. described using a side-viewing duodenoscope to access the ureteroileal anastomosis in Bricker conduits, achieving 79.2% technical success and satisfactory outcomes in all successfully treated patients at mean 43-month follow-up.[39]

Combined antegrade-retrograde approach — Delvecchio et al. advocated this as the preferred method: an antegrade nephrostogram provides better anatomical delineation, while through-and-through access enables rapid identification of stenotic segments hidden by mucosal folds and allows use of larger endoscopes with better irrigation.[40]

Endoscopic vs. open revision — Van Son et al. (27-year experience, 161 procedures) found that at 60 months, patency rates were 69% after open revision vs. 27% after endoscopic treatment (p=0.003), with median patency duration of 15.5 vs. 5 months. However, endoscopic treatment offers a safe, less-invasive alternative to delay or avoid open surgery, especially in patients unfit for major reconstruction.[37]

Role 9 — Stone management in reconstructed urinary tracts​

Ureteroscopy and cystoscopy are essential for managing urolithiasis — one of the most common long-term complications of urinary reconstruction:

  • Stones occur in 28–36% of augmented bladders at 10 years, with a 44% recurrence rate.
  • Antegrade flexible ureteroscopy through a percutaneous access sheath is the preferred approach for upper tract stones in patients with urinary diversions. Stuurman et al. achieved 80% stone-free rates after a single antegrade session in patients with ileal conduits, neobladders, and catheterizable pouches.[41]
  • The antegrade approach is particularly valuable when retrograde access is impossible or extremely difficult due to altered anatomy (continent pouches, neobladders with afferent limbs).
  • Cystoscopic lithotripsy (holmium laser) is used for stones within augmented bladders or continent reservoirs, accessed either per urethra or through catheterizable channels.

Role 10 — Ureteroscopy as a cause of ureteral strictures: iatrogenic considerations​

Ureteroscopy itself can cause the very strictures that reconstructive surgeons must repair:[42][43]

  • Sunaryo et al. (population-based study, 329,776 patients) found ureteral stricture developed in 2.9% of patients after ureteroscopy — approximately twice the rate attributable to stone disease alone (1.5% after SWL). Of those with strictures, 35% required drainage, 21% had endoscopic intervention, 4.8% required reconstructive surgery, and 1.7% underwent nephrectomy.[43]
  • Ulvik et al. (1001 ureteroscopies) identified a 3.0% stricture rate, with independent risk factors including ureteral access sheath use (OR 4.6), ureteral perforation (OR 11.8), and operative time >60 minutes (OR 5.7).[42]
  • Balloon dilation was effective as first-line treatment for post-ureteroscopy strictures in 75% of cases.[42]

These findings underscore the importance of meticulous ureteroscopic technique — avoiding excessive force, minimizing access-sheath use when possible, and limiting operative time — to prevent iatrogenic strictures that may require complex reconstruction.

Part IV: Endoscopy in catheterizable channel management​

Role 11 — Evaluating and treating channel complications​

Cystoscopy through catheterizable channels is essential for managing the most common complications:

  • Stomal stenosis (10–50% of patients) — cystoscopy through the channel identifies the level and severity of stenosis, guides dilation, and determines whether open revision is needed.
  • False passage formation (~9%) — endoscopic evaluation identifies the false tract and guides catheter placement into the true lumen.
  • Channel incontinence — cystoscopy assesses the integrity of the anti-reflux tunnel mechanism and identifies whether the channel has become patulous or the tunnel has shortened.
  • Reservoir stones — cystoscopy through the channel allows direct visualization and lithotripsy of stones within augmented bladders or continent pouches.

Part V: Endoscopy in gender-affirming reconstruction​

Role 12 — Managing neourethral complications after phalloplasty​

Cystoscopy is critical for evaluating and managing the high rate of urethral complications after phalloplasty (fistula ~40%, stricture ~32%). Endoscopic assessment identifies:[44]

  • Stricture location (most commonly at the pars fixa–pars pendulans junction).
  • Fistula tracts and their relationship to the neourethra.
  • Diverticula within the neourethra.
  • Stone formation within the neourethral segment.

Endoscopic dilation or DVIU may be attempted for short neourethral strictures, though definitive reconstruction is often required for complex or recurrent strictures.

Summary table — roles of cystoscopy and ureteroscopy in reconstructive surgery​

Clinical contextEndoscopic roleKey principleRefs
Pelvic reconstructive surgeryIntraoperative cystoscopy to confirm ureteral effluxUniversal cystoscopy recommended (except posterior-compartment only)1, 2
Post-urethroplasty surveillanceFlexible cystoscopy at 3–6 monthsSmall-caliber (<17 Fr) recurrence predicts need for reintervention9, 10, 11
Post-augmentation cystoplastySurveillance cystoscopy for malignancyControversial; symptom-driven cystoscopy preferred over routine14, 15, 16, 22
BNC / VUASDiagnostic (17 Fr passage) and therapeutic (DVIU, MMC, dilation)Stepwise escalation from endoscopic to reconstructive7, 24, 25, 26, 27
Ureteral stricturesDiagnostic ureteroscopy + endoureterotomy / dilationBest for ≤2 cm strictures; reconstruction superior for longer28, 29, 30
Ureteroenteric stricturesAntegrade ureteroscopy + laser incision + triamcinolone80–83% endoscopic success; open revision remains gold standard35, 37, 39, 40
Stones in reconstructed tractsAntegrade URS or cystoscopic lithotripsyAntegrade approach preferred for upper tract stones in diversions41
Catheterizable channel complicationsCystoscopy through channelIdentifies stenosis level, false passages, tunnel integrity—
Post-phalloplasty neourethral complicationsCystoscopy / urethroscopyIdentifies stricture location, fistula, diverticula44
Iatrogenic stricture preventionMeticulous ureteroscopic techniqueSheath use, perforation, >60 min op time are independent risk factors42, 43

Cross-references​

References​

1. Cohen SA, Carberry CL, Smilen SW. "American Urogynecologic Society consensus statement: cystoscopy at the time of prolapse repair." Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2018;24(4):258–259. doi:10.1097/SPV.0000000000000529

2. Stewart LE, Hall E, Carberry CL. "Cystoscopy at the time of incontinence and prolapse surgery." Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2018;30(6):441–445. doi:10.1097/GCO.0000000000000499

3. Harris RL, Cundiff GW, Theofrastous JP, et al. "The value of intraoperative cystoscopy in urogynecologic and reconstructive pelvic surgery." Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;177(6):1367–1369. doi:10.1016/s0002-9378(97)70077-2

4. Cola A, Barba M, Frigerio M. "Intraoperative ultrasound assessment of ureteral patency during pelvic surgery." Int Urogynecol J. 2021;32(12):3313–3315. doi:10.1007/s00192-021-04901-z

5. Chung H, Jeong BC, Kim HH. "Laparoscopic ureteroneocystostomy with vesicopsoas hitch: nonrefluxing ureteral reimplantation using cystoscopy-assisted submucosal tunneling." J Endourol. 2006;20(9):632–638. doi:10.1089/end.2006.20.632

6. Lopes JF, Cendron M, Ellsworth PI. "Cystoscopy at the time of ureteral reimplantation for primary vesicoureteral reflux: is it necessary? Incidence of undetected anomalies and cost." Urology. 2001;57(6):1156–1159. doi:10.1016/s0090-4295(01)01049-4

7. Wessells H, Morey A, Souter L, Rahimi L, Vanni A. "Urethral stricture disease guideline amendment (2023)." J Urol. 2023;210(1):64–71. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000003482

8. Angermeier KW, Rourke KF, Dubey D, Forsyth RJ, Gonzalez CM. "SIU/ICUD consultation on urethral strictures: evaluation and follow-up." Urology. 2014;83(3 Suppl):S8–17. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2013.09.011

9. Goonesinghe SK, Hillary CJ, Nicholson TR, Osman NI, Chapple CR. "Flexible cystourethroscopy in the follow-up of posturethroplasty patients and characterisation of recurrences." Eur Urol. 2015;68(3):523–529. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2015.04.013

10. Amend GM, Nabavizadeh B, Hakam N, et al. "Urethroscopic findings following urethroplasty predict the need for secondary intervention in the long term: a multi-institutional study from Trauma and Urologic Reconstructive Network of Surgeons." J Urol. 2022;207(4):857–865. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000002353

11. Baradaran N, Fergus KB, Moses RA, et al. "Clinical significance of cystoscopic urethral stricture recurrence after anterior urethroplasty: a multi-institution analysis from Trauma and Urologic Reconstructive Network of Surgeons (TURNS)." World J Urol. 2019;37(12):2763–2768. doi:10.1007/s00345-019-02653-6

12. Hoare DT, Doiron RC, Rourke KF. "Determining perioperative practice patterns in urethroplasty: a survey of genitourinary reconstructive surgeons." Urology. 2021;156:263–270. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2021.05.067

13. Calvo CI, Rourke KF. "Routine imaging after bulbar urethral reconstruction does not impact surgical outcomes and may not be necessary." Urology. 2024;186:41–47. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2024.02.029

14. Hamid R, Greenwell TJ, Nethercliffe JM, et al. "Routine surveillance cystoscopy for patients with augmentation and substitution cystoplasty for benign urological conditions: is it necessary?" BJU Int. 2009;104(3):392–395. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08401.x

15. Biardeau X, Chartier-Kastler E, Rouprêt M, Phé V. "Risk of malignancy after augmentation cystoplasty: a systematic review." Neurourol Urodyn. 2016;35(6):675–682. doi:10.1002/nau.22775

16. Higuchi TT, Fox JA, Husmann DA. "Annual endoscopy and urine cytology for the surveillance of bladder tumors after enterocystoplasty for congenital bladder anomalies." J Urol. 2011;186(5):1791–1795. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2011.07.028

17. Soergel TM, Cain MP, Misseri R, et al. "Transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder following augmentation cystoplasty for the neuropathic bladder." J Urol. 2004;172(4 Pt 2):1649–1651. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000140194.87974.56

18. Garnier S, Vendrell J, Boillot B, et al. "Malignancy after augmentation enterocystoplasty: a nationwide study of natural history, prognosis, and oncogene panel analysis." J Urol. 2020;204(1):136–143. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000000752

19. Ceyhan E, Mammadov E, Onder SC, Dogan HS, Tekgul S. "FISH: a promising screening tool for malignancy after augmentation cystoplasty?" J Pediatr Surg. 2024;59(4):725–730. doi:10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2023.11.006

20. Kokorowski PJ, Routh JC, Borer JG, et al. "Screening for malignancy after augmentation cystoplasty in children with spina bifida: a decision analysis." J Urol. 2011;186(4):1437–1443. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2011.05.065

21. Higuchi TT, Granberg CF, Fox JA, Husmann DA. "Augmentation cystoplasty and risk of neoplasia: fact, fiction, and controversy." J Urol. 2010;184(6):2492–2496. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2010.08.038

22. Ginsberg DA, Boone TB, Cameron AP, et al. "The AUA/SUFU guideline on adult neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction: treatment and follow-up." J Urol. 2021;206(5):1106–1113. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000002239

23. Vemulakonda VM, Lendvay TS, Shnorhavorian M, et al. "Metastatic adenocarcinoma after augmentation gastrocystoplasty." J Urol. 2008;179(3):1094–1096. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2007.10.089

24. Britton CJ, Sharma V, Fadel AE, et al. "Vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis following radical prostatectomy: risk factors, natural history, and treatment outcomes." J Urol. 2023;210(2):312–322. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000003488

25. Klein R, Vasan R, Guercio C, Rusilko P. "Minimally invasive management of posterior urethral stricture/stenosis with DVIU and mitomycin C injection." Urology. 2024;183:e317–e319. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2023.10.006

26. Rozanski AT, Zhang LT, Holst DD, et al. "The effect of radiation therapy on the efficacy of internal urethrotomy with intralesional mitomycin C for recurrent vesicourethral anastomotic stenoses and bladder neck contractures: a multi-institutional experience." Urology. 2021;147:294–298. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2020.09.035

27. Abramowitz DJ, Balzano FL, Ruel NH, Chan KG, Warner JN. "Transurethral incision with transverse mucosal realignment for the management of bladder neck contracture and vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis." Urology. 2021;152:102–108. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2021.02.035

28. Ou Y, Zhang G, Zhu X, et al. "Evaluation of risk factors, treatment options, and prognostic-related factors in patients with benign ureteral strictures: an 8-year single-center experience." Int J Urol. 2023;30(10):847–852. doi:10.1111/iju.15211

29. Razdan S, Silberstein IK, Bagley DH. "Ureteroscopic endoureterotomy." BJU Int. 2005;95(Suppl 2):94–101. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05207.x

30. Lu C, Zhang W, Peng Y, et al. "Endoscopic balloon dilatation in the treatment of benign ureteral strictures: a meta-analysis and systematic review." J Endourol. 2019;33(4):255–262. doi:10.1089/end.2018.0797

31. Corcoran AT, Smaldone MC, Ricchiuti DD, Averch TD. "Management of benign ureteral strictures in the endoscopic era." J Endourol. 2009;23(11):1909–1912. doi:10.1089/end.2008.0453

32. Richter F, Irwin RJ, Watson RA, Lang EK. "Endourologic management of benign ureteral strictures with and without compromised vascular supply." Urology. 2000;55(5):652–657. doi:10.1016/s0090-4295(00)00484-2

33. Gao X, Chen J, Wang W, et al. "Step-by-step technique for the endoscopic treatment of ureteric stricture." BJU Int. 2021;128(6):692–696. doi:10.1111/bju.15558

34. Wang B, Gao W, Yang K, et al. "Analysis of the efficacy and risk factors for failure of balloon dilation for benign ureteral stricture." J Clin Med. 2023;12(4):1655. doi:10.3390/jcm12041655

35. Katims AB, Edelblute BT, Tam AW, et al. "Long-term outcomes of laser incision and triamcinolone injection for the management of ureteroenteric anastomotic strictures." J Endourol. 2021;35(1):21–24. doi:10.1089/end.2020.0593

36. Gomez FD, Thomas A, Sempels M, et al. "Outcomes following first-line endourologic management of ureteroenteric anastomotic strictures after urinary diversion: a single-center study." Urology. 2017;102:38–42. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2016.10.009

37. van Son MJ, Lock MTWT, Peters M, van de Putte EEF, Meijer RP. "Treating benign ureteroenteric strictures: 27-year experience comparing endourological techniques with open surgical approach." World J Urol. 2019;37(6):1217–1223. doi:10.1007/s00345-018-2475-4

38. Lobo N, Dupré S, Sahai A, Thurairaja R, Khan MS. "Getting out of a tight spot: an overview of ureteroenteric anastomotic strictures." Nat Rev Urol. 2016;13(8):447–455. doi:10.1038/nrurol.2016.104

39. Costamagna G, Shah SK, Mutignani M, et al. "Use of a duodenoscope to manage complications at the ureteroileal anastomotic site after total urinary bladder resection and the Bricker procedure." Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;55(2):242–248. doi:10.1067/mge.2002.120888

40. Delvecchio FC, Kuo RL, Iselin CE, Webster GD, Preminger GM. "Combined antegrade and retrograde endoscopic approach for the management of urinary diversion-associated pathology." J Endourol. 2000;14(3):251–256. doi:10.1089/end.2000.14.251

41. Stuurman RE, Al-Qahtani SM, Cornu JN, Traxer O. "Antegrade percutaneous flexible endoscopic approach for the management of urinary diversion-associated complications." J Endourol. 2013;27(11):1330–1334. doi:10.1089/end.2012.0371

42. Ulvik Ø, Harneshaug JR, Gjengstø P. "Ureteral strictures following ureteroscopic stone treatment." J Endourol. 2021;35(7):985–990. doi:10.1089/end.2020.0421

43. Sunaryo PL, May PC, Holt SK, et al. "Ureteral strictures following ureteroscopy for kidney stone disease: a population-based assessment." J Urol. 2022;208(6):1268–1275. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000002929

44. Blasdel G, Dy GW, Nikolavsky D, et al. "Urinary reconstruction in genital gender-affirming surgery: checking our surgical complication blind spots." Plast Reconstr Surg. 2024;153(4):792e–803e. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000010813