Literature DB >> 17593442

Comparison of laparoscopic and open pyeloplasty in 100 patients with pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction.

R C Calvert1, M M Morsy, B Zelhof, M Rhodes, N A Burgess.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine whether the morbidity and outcome rates for laparoscopic transperitoneal dismembered pyeloplasty are different from those for dismembered pyeloplasty, to analyze the learning curve of laparoscopic pyeloplasty, and to determine whether preoperative stent placement affects outcome.
METHODS: For this study, 49 laparoscopic pyeloplasties (period 2000-2005) and 51 open pyeloplasties (period 1992-2003) were reviewed.
RESULTS: Compared with open procedures, laparoscopic procedures were associated with a longer mean operating time (159 vs 91 min; p < 0.001), a shorter mean time to normal diet (38 vs 72 h; p < 0.001), and a similar mean hospital stay (5 days; p = 0.6). The operative complication rates were 17% for primary laparoscopic pyeloplasties and 24% for primary open pyeloplasties. The rates were higher for secondary procedures. The success rates for primary and secondary procedures were, respectively, 98% (41/42) and 57% (4/7) for laparoscopy and 96% (46/48) and 67% (2/3) for open surgery. Failed procedures showed no improvement in loin pain or obstruction. At the 6-month follow-up evaluation, 29% of the open surgery patients but none of the laparoscopic surgery patients reported wound pain.
CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of laparoscopic pyeloplasty is equivalent to that of open pyeloplasty, with less wound pain at 6 months. The outcome for secondary procedures is inferior. There was a trend toward a reduction in complications and the conversion rates with time, suggesting that there may be a learning curve of approximately 30 laparoscopic pyeloplasty cases. Preoperative stent insertion did not seem to affect any objective measures of outcome for laparoscopic pyeloplasty.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 17593442     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-007-9436-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  17 in total

Review 1.  Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: the first decade.

Authors:  Adebanji B Adeyoju; David Hrouda; Inderbir S Gill
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 5.588

2.  Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: evolution of a new gold standard.

Authors:  D A Moon; M A El-Shazly; C M Chang; T R Gianduzzo; C G Eden
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2006-04-25       Impact factor: 2.649

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

Authors:  Xu Zhang; Hong-Zhao Li; Xin Ma; Tao Zheng; Bin Lang; Jun Zhang; Bin Fu; Kai Xu; Xiao-Lin Guo
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Retroperitoneal laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty with a minimal incision: comparison of two surgical approaches.

Authors:  M Soulié; M Thoulouzan; P Seguin; P Mouly; N Vazzoler; F Pontonnier; P Plante
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  Our experience with retroperitoneal and transperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty for pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction.

Authors:  Kim Davenport; A Minervini; A G Timoney; F X Keeley
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2005-09-01       Impact factor: 20.096

6.  Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty.

Authors:  W W Schuessler; M T Grune; L V Tecuanhuey; G M Preminger
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Laparoscopic pyeloplasty versus antegrade endopyelotomy: comparison in 100 patients and a new algorithm for the minimally invasive treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

Authors:  Michael C Ost; Jonathan D Kaye; Marc J Guttman; Benjamin R Lee; Arthur D Smith
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  Laparoscopic nephrectomy: the experience of the laparoscopy working group of the German Urologic Association.

Authors:  J Rassweiler; P Fornara; M Weber; G Janetschek; D Fahlenkamp; T Henkel; M Beer; W Stackl; W Boeckmann; F Recker; A Lampel; C Fischer; U Humke; K Miller
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Endopyeloplasty versus endopyelotomy versus laparoscopic pyeloplasty for primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

Authors:  Mihir M Desai; Mahesh R Desai; Inderbir S Gill
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 2.649

10.  Comparison of open versus laparoscopic pyeloplasty techniques in treatment of uretero-pelvic junction obstruction.

Authors:  H Christoph Klingler; Mesut Remzi; Guenter Janetschek; Christian Kratzik; Michael J Marberger
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 20.096

View more
  13 in total

1.  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

2.  Laparoscopic single-incision triangulated umbilical surgery (SITUS) pyeloplasty: a description of the first 32 cases.

Authors:  Martin Habicher; Theodoros Tokas; Thomas Rw Herrmann; Udo Nagele
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-05-12       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  Laparoscopic pyeloplasty practice patterns in Canada.

Authors:  Thomas A A Skinner; Luke Witherspoon; Ali Dergham; Jeffrey E Warren; James Watterson; Brian Blew
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2019-01-21       Impact factor: 1.862

4.  Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: an analysis of first 100 cases and important lessons learned.

Authors:  Onkar Singh; Shilpi Singh Gupta; Nand Kishore Arvind
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2010-05-21       Impact factor: 2.370

5.  Minimally-invasive correction of ureteropelvic junction obstruction: do retrograde endo-incision techniques still have a role in the era of laparoscopic pyeloplasty?

Authors:  Shawky A Elabd; Abdelhamid M Elbahnasy; Yaser A Farahat; Mohamed G Soliman; Mohamed R Taha; Mohmed A Elgarabawy; Robert Figenshau
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2009-12

6.  Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty: technique and results in 105 patients.

Authors:  Sigrid Wagner; Francesco Greco; Antonino Inferrera; M Raschid Hoda; Felix Kawan; Amir Hamza; Paolo Fornara
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2009-10-22       Impact factor: 4.226

7.  Antegrade stenting in laparoscopic pyeloplasty: feasibility of the technique and time required for stent insertion.

Authors:  Andrea Minervini; Giampaolo Siena; Lorenzo Masieri; Alberto Lapini; Sergio Serni; Marco Carini
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-01-01       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Comparison of Surgical Outcomes between Dismembered Pyeloplasty with or without Ureteral Stenting in Children with Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction.

Authors:  June Kim; Sungchan Park; Hyunho Hwang; Jong Won Kim; Sang Hyeon Cheon; Seonghun Park; Kun Suk Kim
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2012-08-16

9.  Technical modifications of double-J stenting for retroperitoneal laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty in children under 5 years old.

Authors:  Zhi Chen; Xiang Chen; Yan-Cheng Luo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-08-11       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Pyeloplasty Using Additional 2 mm Instruments: A Comparison with Conventional Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty.

Authors:  Sung Ho Ju; Dong-Gi Lee; Jun Ho Lee; Min Ki Baek; Byong Chang Jeong; Seong Soo Jeon; Kyu-Sung Lee; Deok Hyun Han
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2011-09-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.