Literature DB >> 17094743

Long-term success of antegrade endopyelotomy compared with pyeloplasty at a single institution.

David S Dimarco1, Matthew T Gettman, Shawn M McGee, George K Chow, Andrew J Leroy, Jeff Slezak, David E Patterson, Joseph W Segura.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: The classic standard for surgical repair of ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction has been open pyeloplasty, with a 95% success rate. Antegrade endopyelotomy is a less-invasive option with a slightly lower success rate. However, recent data call into question the long-term durability of UPJ repair. We present the long-term success of treatment of UPJ obstruction comparing these two modalities. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed the medical records of patients undergoing percutaneous antegrade endopyelotomy or open and laparoscopic pyeloplasty for UPJ repair in our practice from 1988 to 2004. Success was defined as both radiographic and symptomatic improvement. We evaluated the impact of preoperative factors, including prior surgical repair, crossing vessels, renal function, and calculi, on success.
RESULTS: The estimated 3-, 5-, and 10-year recurrence-free survival rates for the endopyelotomy group (N = 182) were 63%, 55%, and 41%, respectively, compared with 85%, 80%, and 75% for the pyeloplasty group (N = 175; P < 0.001). Of the failed endopyelotomies undergoing salvage open repair, 8 of 26 (31%) had crossing vessels. Poor renal function and previous failed pyeloplasty decreased success in the pyeloplasty group. Variation from standard cold-knife incision adversely affected endopyelotomy success.
CONCLUSIONS: Long-term success rates after both endopyelotomy and pyeloplasty are worse than previously reported. Although most failures in both groups occurred within 2 years, failures continue to appear after 5 and 10 years, and patients should be followed accordingly. In view of these results of endopyelotomy, laparoscopic pyeloplasty may prove to be the preferred minimally invasive approach to repair UPJ obstruction.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17094743     DOI: 10.1089/end.2006.20.707

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


  23 in total

Review 1.  Endopyelotomy in the age of laparoscopic and robotic-assisted pyeloplasty.

Authors:  Daniel Yong; David M Albala
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 2.  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

3.  The gold standard for the treatment of uncomplicated adult ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

Authors:  Patrick Luke
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 1.862

4.  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

Review 5.  Ureteropelvic obstruction and renal stones: etiology and treatment.

Authors:  Andreas Skolarikos; Andreas Dellis; Thomas Knoll
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2014-11-02       Impact factor: 3.436

6.  The Comparative Effectiveness of Treatments for Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction.

Authors:  Bruce L Jacobs; Julie C Lai; Rachana Seelam; Janet M Hanley; J Stuart Wolf; Brent K Hollenbeck; John M Hollingsworth; Andrew W Dick; Claude M Setodji; Christopher S Saigal
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2017-09-21       Impact factor: 2.649

7.  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

8.  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

9.  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

10.  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
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.