title: Optimized method for ureteric reconstruction in a mouse kidney transplant model.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Murine kidney transplantation is an important model for studies of transplantation immunobiology. The most challenging aspect of the difficult surgical procedure is the ureteric anastomosis.
  
  
  METHODS
  Two different approaches to ureteric reconstruction are compared here. Method 1, Patch: this involves anastomosis of the donor ureter together with a patch of donor bladder to recipient bladder. Method 2, Implant: this utilizes a 5-0 suture to pull the ureter through the bladder wall. The ureter's peripheral tissue is then fixed to the bladder wall at the implant site with 10-0 micro-sutures.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In animals transplanted with the patch method, the initial success rate, defined as survival up to the third post-operative day, was 79% (n = 62), whereas the initial success rate for the implant method was 86.1% (n = 101; P = 0.28). The death rate from unknown and/or unspecified causes in the initial period was 16.1% (10/62) for the patch method, and 8.9% (9/101) for the implant method (P = 0.21). The average donor/recipient operation time with the implant method was 14.8 ± 2.2/61.4 ± 4.7 min (76 min per transplant), whereas operation time with the patch method was 28.3 ± 2.4/77.8 ± 5.5 min (106 min per transplant; P < 0.001). The ureteric implant method resulted in a lower rate of urinary leak compared with the patch method (1.1% versus 10.2%; P = 0.02).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The ureteric implant method for mouse kidney transplantation is a reliable approach with at least as high a success rate as the bladder patch method and with a shorter operation time.
authors.affiliation: Collaborative Transplantation Research Group, Bosch Institute, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital and The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
authors.forename: Zane Z
authors.initials: ZZ
authors.lastname: Wang
authors.forename: Chuanmin
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Wang
authors.forename: Eithne C
authors.initials: EC
authors.lastname: Cunningham
authors.forename: Richard D M
authors.initials: RD
authors.lastname: Allen
authors.forename: Alexandra F
authors.initials: AF
authors.lastname: Sharland
authors.forename: George Alexander
authors.initials: GA
authors.lastname: Bishop
mesh_terms: D000714:Anastomosis, Surgical / Q000379:methods; D000818:Animals; D004195:Disease Models, Animal; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D016030:Kidney Transplantation / Q000379:methods*; D008297:Male; D051379:Mice; D008807:Mice, Inbred BALB C; D008810:Mice, Inbred C57BL; D016016:Proportional Hazards Models; D019736:Prostheses and Implants; D011897:Random Allocation; D019651:Plastic Surgery Procedures / Q000379:methods*; D018709:Statistics, Nonparametric; D066027:Transplant Recipients; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014513:Ureter / Q000601:surgery*; D001743:Urinary Bladder / Q000601:surgery*
keywords: anastomosis; kidney; mouse; transplantation; ureter