Literature DB >> 16890694

Retrospective comparison of retroperitoneal laparoscopic versus open dismembered pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

Xu Zhang1, Hong-Zhao Li, Xin Ma, Tao Zheng, Bin Lang, Jun Zhang, Bin Fu, Kai Xu, Xiao-Lin Guo.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We evaluated the clinical value of retroperitoneal laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction compared with open surgery.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The clinical data of 56 patients who underwent retroperitoneal laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty were retrospectively compared with those of 40 patients who underwent open dismembered pyeloplasty through a retroperitoneal flank approach. The Student t test, Pearson chi-square test and Mann-Whitney rank sum test were applied for statistical analysis as appropriate.
RESULTS: Patient demographic data were similar between the 2 groups. In the laparoscopic group operative time (80 vs 120 minutes), estimated blood loss (10 vs 150 ml), recovery of intestinal function (1 vs 2 days), analgesic requirements (diclofenac sodium suppository) (75 vs 150 mg), incision length (3.5 vs 21 cm) and postoperative hospital stay (7 vs 9 days) were better than in the open group (p <0.001 for all). No intraoperative complications occurred in either group. The incidence of postoperative complications (2 of 56, 3.6% vs 3 of 40, 7.5%, p = 0.729) and success rates (55 of 56, 98.2% vs 39 of 40, 97.5%, p = 0.058) were equivalent in the 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Retroperitoneal laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty is a minimally invasive, safe and effective therapy for ureteropelvic junction obstruction with low morbidity, shorter convalescence and excellent outcomes, and can be accomplished reasonably quickly in experienced hands.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16890694     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.04.073

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


  11 in total

1.  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

2.  The single needle method for urethrovesical anastomosis with strengthened posterior fixation during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Xu Zhang; Zhenghua Ju; Chao Wang; Xing Ai; Xin Ma; Taoping Shi; Guoxi Zhang; Baojun Wang
Journal:  J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci       Date:  2009-12-29

3.  Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty: comparison of two surgical approaches- a single centre experience of three years.

Authors:  Punit Bansal; Aman Gupta; Ritesh Mongha; Srinivas Narayan; Ranjit K Das; Malay Bera; Sudip C Chakraborty; Anup K Kundu
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 0.656

Review 4.  Is it always necessary to treat a ureteropelvic junction syndrome?

Authors:  Paul J Van Cangh
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 3.092

5.  Experience with laparoscopy-assisted retroperitoneal pyeloplasty in children.

Authors:  Mohan K Abraham; Abdul Rasheed A Nasir; S Bindu; P Ramakrishnan; Prashant M Kedari; Gopidas R Unnithan; Kalyan Ravi Prasad Damisetti
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2009-06-11       Impact factor: 1.827

6.  Trends in followup imaging after adult pyeloplasty.

Authors:  Ryan S Hsi; Sarah K Holt; John L Gore; Jonathan D Harper
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2014-01-11       Impact factor: 7.450

7. 

Authors:  Jeff Warren; Vitor da Silva; Yves Caumartin; Patrick P W Luke
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 1.862

8.  Ureteral obstruction swine model through laparoscopy and single port for training on laparoscopic pyeloplasty.

Authors:  Idoia Díaz-Güemes Martín-Portugués; Laura Hernández-Hurtado; Jesús Usón-Casaús; Miguel Angel Sánchez-Hurtado; Francisco Miguel Sánchez-Margallo
Journal:  Int J Med Sci       Date:  2013-06-21       Impact factor: 3.738

9.  Mini incision open pyeloplasty - Improvement in patient outcome.

Authors:  Vishwajeet Singh; Manish Garg; Pradeep Sharma; Rahul Janak Sinha; Manoj Kumar
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2015 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.541

10.  Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty: Comparison of two surgical approaches -- a single centre experience of three years.

Authors:  Punit Bansal; Aman Gupta; Ritesh Mongha; Srinivas Narayan; A K Kundu; S C Chakraborty; R K Das; M K Bera
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 1.407

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.