Literature DB >> 19118431

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

Andrea Minervini1, Giampaolo Siena, Lorenzo Masieri, Alberto Lapini, Sergio Serni, Marco Carini.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the authors' initial experience with antegrade stenting. It focused on the success rate, time required for stent insertion, possible complications, and relative solutions in the first 44 procedures.
METHODS: Between March 2005 and April 2008, 44 patients (21 women and 23 men) with a mean age of 33 years (range, 17-59 years) underwent transperitoneal laparoscopic Anderson-Hynes pyeloplasty in the authors' department. Antegrade stenting was attempted for all the patients. The time required for stent insertion was recorded as the time from cannula insertion to the correct positioning of the stent in the pelvis. A 4.8-Fr, 26-cm stent was the stent of choice for the first four cases. Then the 6-Fr, 26-cm stent was adopted for all the remaining patients except for one, for whom a 6-Fr, 28-cm stent was adopted.
RESULTS: The mean operative time was 197 min (median, 180 min; range, 150-390 min). No conversions to open surgery were required. The stent was positioned correctly in the bladder at the end of the antegrade procedure in 97.7% of the patients without the need for a postoperative X-ray in 95% of the cases. The mean time required for antegrade insertion of the stent was 7 min 30 s (median, 6 min 13 s; range, 3 min 40 s to 22 min 30 s). In the final 12 procedures, the time for stent insertion was constantly reduced to a mean of 4 min 10 s (median, 4 min; range, 3 min 40 s to 7 min). Neither intraoperative nor postoperative complications related to antegrade stent positioning were observed.
CONCLUSION: Our data confirm the antegrade procedure to be an easy-to-learn, safe, and reliable stenting technique, with an overall mean time of 7 min 30 s required for insertion, and with a mean time of 4 min 10 s required for insertion in the final 12 procedures. It obviates the problem of having the stent in the renal pelvis during dissection and suturing and of repositioning the patient onto the flank for the laparoscopic procedure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19118431     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-008-0272-7

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


  15 in total

1.  How to insert a double J stent in laparoscopic retroperitoneal dismembered pyeloplasty: a new technique.

Authors:  Yassine Nouira; Ali Horchani
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 1.719

2.  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

Review 3.  Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: status and review of literature.

Authors:  M A El-Shazly; D A Moon; C G Eden
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 2.942

4.  Is retrograde stenting more reliable than antegrade stenting for pyeloplasty in infants and children?

Authors:  V V S S Chandrasekharam
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2005-12       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.  Dismembered laparoscopic pyeloplasty with antegrade placement of ureteral stent: simplification of the technique.

Authors:  Henrique Rodrigues; Paulo Rodrigues; Marcos Ruela; Antônio Bernabé; Gilberto Buogo
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2002 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.541

8.  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

9.  Antegrade versus retrograde stenting in laparoscopic pyeloplasty.

Authors:  Nimalan Arumainayagam; Andrea Minervini; Kim Davenport; Vivekanandan Kumar; Lorenzo Masieri; Sergio Serni; Marco Carini; Anthony G Timoney; Francis X Keeley
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.942

10.  Is antegrade stenting superior to retrograde stenting in laparoscopic pyeloplasty?

Authors:  Anil Mandhani; Shailendra Goel; Mahendra Bhandari
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 7.450

View more
  5 in total

1.  Is confirmation of ureteric stent placement in laparoscopic pyeloplasty necessary?

Authors:  D B Hennessey; N J Kinnear; R M Evans; C Hagan; A Thwaini
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2017-03-04       Impact factor: 2.370

2.  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

3.  Stenting Antegrade Via Veress Needle during Laparoscopic PyeloplastY ("SAVVY" Technique).

Authors:  Ramesh Babu; Apurva Arora; Niranjan Raj
Journal:  J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg       Date:  2019 Apr-Jun

4.  Antegrade stent placement in laparoscopic upper urinary tract surgery. Is there an easy way?

Authors:  Kaan Gökçen; Gökhan Gökçe; Yakup Kordan; Emre Kıraç; Gökçe Dündar; Emin Yener Gültekin
Journal:  Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne       Date:  2018-07-23       Impact factor: 1.195

5.  Impact of Extracorporeal Stent Placement during Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty on Operative Duration.

Authors:  Hasan Demirkan; Kaya Horasanli
Journal:  Sisli Etfal Hastan Tip Bul       Date:  2021-07-02
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.