Abstract
<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> The timing of surgical repair for ureterovaginal fistula (UVF) is under debate, here we introduce our experience to compare the safety and efficacy between early and delayed ureteral reimplantation for UVF. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Between January 2012 and January 2020, 22 patients who were diagnosed with UVF had received ureteral reimplantation. Baseline characteristics, history of previous abdominal surgery, operative profile, and follow-up data were collected and analyzed. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Among 22 patients diagnosed with UVF, 12 patients received early ureteral reimplantation and others received delayed ureteral reimplantation. Both groups were comparable in baseline characteristics and detailed history of previous operations. The mean operative time of the early surgery group was 140.83 ± 35.28 min, while that of the delayed surgery group was 181.00 ± 43.83 min (<i>p</i> = 0.027). Patients of the early surgery group (183.33 ± 107.31 mL) had less blood loss compared with that of the delayed surgery group (285.00 ± 94.43 mL) (<i>p</i> = 0.030). After an overall mean follow-up of 34.55 months, the ureteral stricture rate of two groups was not statistically significantly different (16.67% in early repair vs. 40.00% in delayed repair, <i>p</i> = 0.348). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> With similar long-term outcomes, the early ureteral reimplantation had a shorter operative time and less blood loss. Moreover, the stress during the waiting period could be minimized. High-quality clinical studies with larger sample size are needed to confirm the superior nature of early surgery.