Literature DB >> 10458344

Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty: assessment of objective and subjective outcome.

J J Bauer1, J T Bishoff, R G Moore, R N Chen, A J Iverson, L R Kavoussi.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We determine the subjective and objective durability of laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: From August 1993 to April 1997, 42 patients underwent laparoscopic pyeloplasty (laparoscopy group) with a minimum clinical followup of 12 months (mean 22). Subjective outcomes and objective findings were compared to those of 35 patients who underwent open pyeloplasty (open surgery group) from August 1986 to April 1997 with a minimum clinical followup of 12 months (mean 58). We assessed clinical outcome based on responses to a subjective analog pain and activity scale. In addition, radiographic outcome was assessed based on the results of the most recent radiographic study.
RESULTS: Of the 42 laparoscopy group patients 90% (38) were pain-free (26, 62%) or had significant improvement in flank pain (12, 29%) after surgery. Two patients had only minor improvement and 2 had no improvement in pain. Surgery failed in only 1 patient with complete obstruction. A patent ureteropelvic junction was demonstrated in 98% (41 of 42 patients) of the laparoscopy group on the most recent radiographic study (mean radiographic followup 15 months). Of the 35 open surgery group patients 91% were pain-free (21, 60%) or significantly improved (11, 31%) after surgery. One patient had only minor improvement and 2 were worse.
CONCLUSIONS: Pain relief, improved activity level and relief of obstruction outcomes are equivalent for laparoscopic and open pyeloplasty.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10458344     DOI: 10.1097/00005392-199909010-00016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  44 in total

1.  [Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in adults: Excellent long-term results of primary pyeloplasty].

Authors:  M Traumann; L A Kluth; M Schmid; C Meyer; B Schwaiger; C Rosenbaum; P Schriefer; M Fisch; R Dahlem; D Seiler; S Ahyai; A Haese; F K-H Chun
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 2.  Laparoscopy in pediatric urology.

Authors:  J I Telsey; A A Caldamone
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 3.092

3.  Prospective cost analysis of laparoscopic vs. open pyeloplasty in children: Single centre contemporary evaluation comparing two procedures over a 1-year period.

Authors:  Katherine Moore; Armando J Lorenzo; Suzanne Turner; Darius J Bägli; Joao L Pippi Salle; Walid A Farhat
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.862

4.  Laparoscopic management of hydronephrosis in children.

Authors:  Alaa El-Ghoneimi
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2004-12-17       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 5.  Minimally invasive surgery.

Authors:  B Jaffray
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 3.791

6.  [Reconstructive procedures in laparoscopic urology].

Authors:  G Janetschek
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 0.639

7.  UPJ Obstruction in the Adult Population: Are Crossing Vessels Significant?

Authors:  M Grasso; R P Caruso; C K Phillips
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2001

Review 8.  Comparison of surgical approaches to ureteropelvic junction obstruction: endopyeloplasty versus endopyelotomy versus laparoscopic pyeloplasty.

Authors:  Robert J Stein; Inderbir S Gill; Mihir M Desai
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 3.092

9.  Comparison of laparoscopic and open pyeloplasty in 100 patients with pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction.

Authors:  R C Calvert; M M Morsy; B Zelhof; M Rhodes; N A Burgess
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Renal calculi with retrocaval ureter: is percutaneous nephrolithotomy sufficient?

Authors:  Jai Prakash; Anubhav Raj; Satyanarayan Sankhwar; Vishwajeet Singh
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2013-03-26
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.