Literature DB >> 16190831

Safety profile and complications of transperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty: a critical analysis.

Anil Mandhani1, Devendra Kumar, Anant Kumar, Rakesh Kapoor, Deepak Dubey, Aneesh Srivastava, Mahendra Bhandari.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To critically assess the safety profile and complications of the transperitoneal approach to laparoscopic pyeloplasty at our center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 2002 to January 2004, 92 patients with a mean age of 22.78 +/- 15.15 years (range 14 months-65 years) with primary (N = 90) or secondary (N = 2) ureteropelvic junction obstruction were treated by transperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty and were evaluated for this study. Renal stones were present in eight patients. A double-J stent was placed antegrade in 50 patients and in the rest through cystoscopy. All patients were followed up clinically and by renal scan.
RESULTS: Of the 92 cases (93 renal units), 6 were converted to open pyeloplasty. Dismembered pyeloplasty was performed in 59, Fengerplasty in 8, and Foley Y-V-plasty in 20 units. A crossing vessel was present in 15 units (16.12%). The mean estimated blood loss was 63.6 mL (range, 30-200 mL). The mean operative time was 179.4 minutes (range 80-350 minutes). Overall, 17 patients (18.4%) had complications. Six patients had paralytic ileus and another six had increased drain output, which delayed the hospital stay to 7 days. Pyelonephritis and port-site hernia occurred in one patient each. Four patients required ancillary procedures: ureteroscopy for a migrating stent (1), percutaneous antegrade stenting (1), and SWL for residual stone (2). The mean hospital stay was 4 days (range 2-7 days). Of the 87 units (86 patients), 81 (93.3%) have shown improvement in symptoms and drainage pattern on renal scan at a mean followup of 12 (3-27) months.
CONCLUSION: The transperitoneal approach to pyeloplasty is safe and effective, although patients with large stone bulk and multiple stones should be considered for an alternative approach. The double-J stent should be checked carefully for proper placement. Hemostasis of the cut margin of the renal pelvis, watertight anastomosis, and adequate drainage should also be ensured.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16190831     DOI: 10.1089/end.2005.19.797

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endourol        ISSN: 0892-7790            Impact factor:   2.942


  9 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.  Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: the standard of care for ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

Authors:  Anil Kapoor; Christopher B Allard
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 1.862

4.  Laparoscopic pyeloplasty in pediatric patients: the SGPGI experience.

Authors:  Ruchir Maheshwari; M S Ansari; Anil Mandhani; Aneesh Srivastava; Rakesh Kapoor
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2010 Jan-Mar

5.  Comparison of surgical and functional outcomes of open, laparoscopic and robotic pyeloplasty for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

Authors:  Cem Başataç; Uğur Boylu; Fikret Fatih Önol; Eyüp Gümüş
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2014-03

6.  Transperitoneal Versus Retroperitoneal Robotic-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty for Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction in Children. A Multicentre, Prospective Study.

Authors:  Thomas Blanc; Olivier Abbo; Fabrizio Vatta; Julien Grosman; Fabienne Marquant; Caroline Elie; Mélodie Juricic; Samia Laraqui; Aline Broch; Alexis Arnaud
Journal:  Eur Urol Open Sci       Date:  2022-06-15

7.  Minimal invasive treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction in low volume pelvis: A comparative study of endopyelotomy and laparoscopic nondismembered pyeloplasty.

Authors:  Pratipal Singh; Paresh Jain; Anand Dharaskar; Anil Mandhani; Deepak Dubey; Rakesh Kapoor; Anant Kumar; Aneesh Srivastava
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2009-01

8.  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

9.  Transmesocolic approach for left side laparoscopic pyeloplasty: comparison with laterocolic approach in the initial learning period.

Authors:  Hyun Ho Han; Won Sik Ham; Jang Hwan Kim; Chang Hee Hong; Young Deuk Choi; Sang Won Han; Byung Ha Chung
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2013-01-01       Impact factor: 2.759

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.