PURPOSE: We assessed the usefulness of RALP in children and compared an age matched cohort undergoing OPN to RALP for safety, efficacy, operative time, blood loss, in-hospital narcotic use and LOS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective case-control study from 2000 to 2004 of 33 patients undergoing RALP and 33 undergoing OPN. Average age of each group was not significantly different (RALP 7.8 years vs OPN 7.6 years, p = 0.75). Mean followup of RALP and OPN groups was 10 and 21 months, respectively. RESULTS: Etiology of the obstruction was not significantly different. Mean operative time was significantly less for OPN (181 minutes vs 219 minutes for RALP, p = 0.031). As RALP experience increased, operative times improved and approached the OPN experience. RALP complications included 1 patient requiring reoperative surgery vs no complications in the OPN group (p = 0.15). Patients undergoing RALP had a mean LOS of 2.3 days compared to 3.5 days for OPN (p <0.001). Total narcotic requirements were significantly less in the RALP group (p = 0.001). All patients in the OPN and 31 in the RALP group had either resolution of hydronephrosis, improvement in drainage or relief of symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: We documented the safety and efficacy of RALP in children. RALP showed advantages of decreased hospital stay, decreased narcotic use and operative times approaching those of open surgery. RALP is an option for pyeloplasty, and as robotic technology improves, this method of repair may become the minimally invasive treatment of choice.
PURPOSE: We assessed the usefulness of RALP in children and compared an age matched cohort undergoing OPN to RALP for safety, efficacy, operative time, blood loss, in-hospital narcotic use and LOS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective case-control study from 2000 to 2004 of 33 patients undergoing RALP and 33 undergoing OPN. Average age of each group was not significantly different (RALP 7.8 years vs OPN 7.6 years, p = 0.75). Mean followup of RALP and OPN groups was 10 and 21 months, respectively. RESULTS: Etiology of the obstruction was not significantly different. Mean operative time was significantly less for OPN (181 minutes vs 219 minutes for RALP, p = 0.031). As RALP experience increased, operative times improved and approached the OPN experience. RALP complications included 1 patient requiring reoperative surgery vs no complications in the OPN group (p = 0.15). Patients undergoing RALP had a mean LOS of 2.3 days compared to 3.5 days for OPN (p <0.001). Total narcotic requirements were significantly less in the RALP group (p = 0.001). All patients in the OPN and 31 in the RALP group had either resolution of hydronephrosis, improvement in drainage or relief of symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: We documented the safety and efficacy of RALP in children. RALP showed advantages of decreased hospital stay, decreased narcotic use and operative times approaching those of open surgery. RALP is an option for pyeloplasty, and as robotic technology improves, this method of repair may become the minimally invasive treatment of choice.