V V S S Chandrasekharam1. 1. Department of Pediatric Surgery and Pediatric Urology, Rainbow Children's Hospital, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India. vvsssekharam@yahoo.co.in
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare antegrade and retrograde internal double-J stenting for pyeloplasty drainage in children. The success of placing the stent in position and the complications were compared in both groups. METHODS: Between October 2001 and December 2004, 42 children with unilateral pelviureteral junction obstruction underwent pyeloplasty by a single surgeon. Antegrade and retrograde double-J stenting was attempted in 17 children (mean age 1.3 years) and 25 children (mean age 1.5 years), respectively. Antegrade stenting was attempted during the pelviureteral anastomosis, and the retrograde stent was placed just before the operation by cystoscopy. Fluoroscopy was not routinely used to confirm stent placement in either group. The stents were removed 4 weeks later at cystoscopy. RESULTS: Successful stent placement without malpositioning was achieved in 14 (82%) of 17 and 24 (96%) of 25 children, respectively, in the antegrade and retrograde groups. The cause of unsuccessful stenting in both groups was the inability to cross the ureterovesical junction. The mean time taken for retrograde stenting was 9 minutes (range 6 to 15). All children with successful stent placement by either technique were discharged within 72 hours after the operation. The hospital stay for children with unsuccessful double-J stent placement varied from 7 to 10 days. No stent malpositioning occurred with retrograde stenting; 1 child in the antegrade stent group had a malpositioned stent in the distal ureter, which was retrieved at ureteroscopy. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, retrograde double-J stenting seems more reliable than antegrade stenting for pediatric pyeloplasty, with greater success and lower complication rates.
OBJECTIVES: To compare antegrade and retrograde internal double-J stenting for pyeloplasty drainage in children. The success of placing the stent in position and the complications were compared in both groups. METHODS: Between October 2001 and December 2004, 42 children with unilateral pelviureteral junction obstruction underwent pyeloplasty by a single surgeon. Antegrade and retrograde double-J stenting was attempted in 17 children (mean age 1.3 years) and 25 children (mean age 1.5 years), respectively. Antegrade stenting was attempted during the pelviureteral anastomosis, and the retrograde stent was placed just before the operation by cystoscopy. Fluoroscopy was not routinely used to confirm stent placement in either group. The stents were removed 4 weeks later at cystoscopy. RESULTS: Successful stent placement without malpositioning was achieved in 14 (82%) of 17 and 24 (96%) of 25 children, respectively, in the antegrade and retrograde groups. The cause of unsuccessful stenting in both groups was the inability to cross the ureterovesical junction. The mean time taken for retrograde stenting was 9 minutes (range 6 to 15). All children with successful stent placement by either technique were discharged within 72 hours after the operation. The hospital stay for children with unsuccessful double-J stent placement varied from 7 to 10 days. No stent malpositioning occurred with retrograde stenting; 1 child in the antegrade stent group had a malpositioned stent in the distal ureter, which was retrieved at ureteroscopy. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, retrograde double-J stenting seems more reliable than antegrade stenting for pediatric pyeloplasty, with greater success and lower complication rates.