Use of buccal mucosa graft in robotic-assisted ureteroplasty: experience of a multidisciplinary group in Mexico
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.48193/t3pfhy49Keywords:
Robot assisted ureteroplasty, Buccal mucosa graf, Reconstrutive urology, Onlay ureteroplasty. , Ureteral strictureAbstract
Introduction: Complex ureteral strictures are challenging, particularly after failed surgery. Buccal mucosa graft ureteroplasty combined with robotic assistance may facilitate precise dissection, preserve periureteral blood supply and minimize manipulation. This paper describes the first experience in ureteral reconstruction with BMG with robotic surgery in a referral center in Mexico.
Materials and methods: Retrospective analysis of 5 patients who underwent robotic BMG ureteroplasty from July 2023 to July 2025. Patients had upper or mid-ureteral strictures > 3cm and were not candidates for tension free end-to-end repair. Every intervention was performed by the same team, following a standardized protocol including: use of Indocyanine Green (Intravenous or intraluminal) to identify stricture and vascularization, simultaneous ureteroscopy evaluation and mucosal graft harvesting by a second team. Technique selection- augmented anastomotic ureteroplasty (AAU) vs onlay was based on segment characteristics (luminal obliteration vs narrowing) The follow-up included ultrasound at the 6th week and follow-up on the 6th and 12th months.
Results: Median age was 45 years (36-62 range), female predominance (60 %). Stricture location was ureteropelvic junction in 3 patients (n=3, 60 %), proximal ureter (20 %) and mid-ureter (20 %). 3 patients (60 %) had history of reconstructive surgery. All patients underwent previous ureteral rest. The stricture length was 3.2cm (3-3.5cm range). AAU was performed in (20 %) patients while onlay technique was used in 3 (60 %). We presented 2 early postoperative complications (40 %), Clavien-Dindo I (post-hematoma and urinary tract infection), no major complications. The mean follow-up was 18 months (4-24 range), with no clinical or radiologic recurrence.
Conclusions: Robotic assisted buccal mucosal graft ureteroplasty is an effective and safe technique for ureteral strictures >3cm. Our early results show a 100 % success rate with only mild complications according to the findings on international literature. Larger multicenter cohorts with longer follow-up are warranted to confirm durability and identify predictors of success.
References
1. Lescay HA, Jiang J, Leslie SW, Tuma F. Anatomy, Abdomen and Pelvis Ureter. In: StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2026. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK532980/ [Accessed 20th September 2026].
2. Lee Z, Keehn AY, Sterling ME, Metro MJ, Eun DD. A Review of Buccal Mucosa Graft Ureteroplasty. Current Urology Reports. 2018;19(4): 23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-018-0772-5.
3. Fröber R. Surgical anatomy of the ureter. BJU international. 2007;100(4): 949–965. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.07207.x.
4. Naude JH. Buccal mucosal grafts in the treatment of ureteric lesions. BJU international. 1999;83(7): 751–754. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.00019.x.
5. Sadhu S, Pandit K, Roy MK, Bajoria SK. Buccal mucosa ureteroplasty for the treatment of complex ureteric injury. The Indian Journal of Surgery. 2011;73(1): 71–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-010-0199-9.
6. Lee Z, Lee M, Koster H, Lee R, Cheng N, Jun M, et al. A Multi-Institutional Experience With Robotic Ureteroplasty With Buccal Mucosa Graft: An Updated Analysis of Intermediate-Term Outcomes. Urology. 2021;147: 306–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2020.08.003.
7. Pozo JG del, Ignacio CV, Carballido RJ. USO DE INJERTO DE MUCOSA ORAL EN EL TRATAMIENTO DE ESTENOSIS URETERALES EXTENSAS: REVISIÓN DE CONJUNTO. Archivos Españoles de Urología. 2017;70(4): 445–453.
8. Zhao LC, Yamaguchi Y, Bryk DJ, Adelstein SA, Stifelman MD. Robot-Assisted Ureteral Reconstruction Using Buccal Mucosa. Urology. 2015;86(3): 634–638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.06.006.
9. Do M, Kallidonis P, Qazi H, Liatsikos E, Ho Thi P, Dietel A, et al. Robot-assisted technique for boari flap ureteral reimplantation: is robot assistance beneficial? Journal of Endourology. 2014;28(6): 679–685. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2013.0775.
10. Chao BW, Raver M, Lin JS, Zhao K, Lee M, Gelman S, et al. Robotic Buccal Mucosa Graft Ureteroplasty: A Decade of Experience From a Multi-institutional Cohort. Urology. 2025;197: 174–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2024.11.059.
11. Zhao LC, Weinberg AC, Lee Z, Ferretti MJ, Koo HP, Metro MJ, et al. Robotic Ureteral Reconstruction Using Buccal Mucosa Grafts: A Multi-institutional Experience. European Urology. 2018;73(3): 419–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2017.11.015.
Additional Files
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Revista Mexicana de Urología

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

