Literature DB >> 15245924

Endopyeloplasty versus endopyelotomy versus laparoscopic pyeloplasty for primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

Mihir M Desai1, Mahesh R Desai, Inderbir S Gill.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To present our intermediate-term (1-year) data on endopyeloplasty and retrospectively compare it with endopyelotomy and laparoscopic pyeloplasty in 44 patients with primary ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction. Endopyeloplasty, horizontal percutaneous suturing of a conventional longitudinal endopyelotomy incision, is a promising novel option for minimally invasive management of UPJ obstruction. We recently developed the technique and demonstrated the clinical feasibility of percutaneous endopyeloplasty.
METHODS: At our two institutions, 44 consecutive, nonrandomized patients with primary UPJ obstruction underwent percutaneous endopyeloplasty (n = 15; group 1), percutaneous endopyelotomy (n = 15; group 2), or laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty (n = 14; group 3). The study inclusion criteria were short segment (less than 1 cm) stenosis, no prior surgery for UPJ obstruction, and no crossing vessels in groups 1 and 2. The mean patient age was 30.3, 38.6, and 38.9 years and the duration of symptoms was 5.5, 6, and 6.6 months in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Postoperative success was evaluated by symptoms, intravenous urography, and/or diuretic renography.
RESULTS: The mean operative time was 119 minutes in group 1, 52 minutes in group 2, and 243 minutes in group 3 (P <0.001). Complications occurred in 3 patients in group 1 (fever in 2 and fluid extravasation in 1), 2 patients in group 2 (bleeding in 1 and urinoma in 1), and no patients in group 3. The duration of double-J stent placement was 2, 4, and 6 weeks in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. A resolution of symptoms and unobstructed drainage on intravenous urography and/or diuretic renography was noted in 100% and 100% of patients in group 1 (mean follow-up 11.6 months), 93% and 88% of patients in group 2 (mean follow-up 31.4 months), and 93% and 100% of patients in group 3 (mean follow-up 20 months).
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this retrospective comparison of patients with primary UPJ obstruction suggest that percutaneous endopyeloplasty may have functional superiority over percutaneous endopyelotomy. The technical simplicity and shorter operative time of endopyeloplasty are advantages compared with laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Endopyeloplasty may be associated with a shorter duration of stenting compared with the other techniques. Longer term follow-up in a larger group of patients from multiple centers and a prospective randomized comparison among these various minimally invasive approaches are necessary to validate these preliminary results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15245924     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2004.02.031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  12 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  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

3.  Cost Analysis of Treatments for Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction.

Authors:  Bruce L Jacobs; Rachana Seelam; Julie C Lai; Janet M Hanley; J Stuart Wolf; Brent K Hollenbeck; John M Hollingsworth; Andrew W Dick; Claude M Setodji; Christopher S Saigal
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2017-01-05       Impact factor: 2.942

Review 4.  The use of the Acucise technique for ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a trade-off between efficacy and invasiveness?

Authors:  Joyce Baard; Theodorus M de Reijke; Jean J M C H de la Rosette
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 3.092

5.  Percutaneous nephroscopic surgery.

Authors:  Tae-Kon Hwang
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2010-05-19

6.  Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: the updated McMaster University experience.

Authors:  Jihao Dong; Jaime Wong; Ahmad Al-Enezi; Anil Kapoor; J Paul Whelan; Kevin Piercey; Edward D Matsumoto
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 1.862

7.  Minimally invasive surgical options for ureteropelvic junction obstruction: A significant step in the right direction.

Authors:  Stephanie J Symons; Victor Palit; Chandra Shekhar Biyani; Jon J Cartledge; Anthony J Browning; Adrian D Joyce
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2009-01

8.  Endopyelotomy vs. laparoscopic pyeloplasty.

Authors:  Alan Shindel
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2007-01

9.  Comparison of endopyelotomy and laparoscopic pyeloplasty for poorly functioning kidneys with ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

Authors:  Pratipal Singh; Rakesh Kapoor; Amit Suri; Kamal Jeet Singh; Anil Mandhani; Deepak Dubey; Aneesh Srivastava; Anant Kumar
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2007-01

10.  Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty: a multi-institutional prospective study.

Authors:  Mohamed Gadelmoula; Mohammad S Abdel-Kader; Mahmoud Shalaby; Mostafa Abdelrazek; Ahmed Mohamed Moeen; Mohamed Ali Zarzour; Nasreldin Mohammed; Paolo Fornara
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2018-08-20
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.