Literature DB >> 20626236

Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction: experience with 142 cases in a high-volume center.

Onkar Singh1, Shilpi Singh Gupta, Ankur Hastir, Nand Kishore Arvind.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty (LDP) is a minimally invasive approach that is becoming standard management of ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). It provides similar results when compared with open surgery. The main goal of LDP is to meet the standard of open dismembered pyeloplasty with reduced trauma for the patients. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the postoperative and functional results of LDP. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed and analyzed 142 cases of LDP performed at our center over a period of 7 years (January 2003 to December 2009) for UPJO with dilatation of the renal pelvis. Patients' profiles and perioperative, intraoperative, and postoperative parameters, such as time of surgery, blood loss, complications, duration of hospital stay, and outcomes of the procedure, were all evaluated and analyzed.
RESULTS: The mean operative time for LDP was 145 minutes (range 110-180 min), and the mean estimated blood loss was negligible in all patients. The mean hospital stay was 3.5 days (3-6 d). Two conversions to open surgery occurred because of difficulty to complete the anastomosis. In one patient, shock caused by bleeding from inferior epigastric vessels near the port site developed and had to be explored. The success rate was 96.8%.
CONCLUSION: When performed by expert surgeons, LDP can safely achieve success rates that are comparable to those of open surgery described in the literature, with fewer complications and less morbidity to the patients. The few important difficulties with their management that we encountered are discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20626236     DOI: 10.1089/end.2010.0002

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


  6 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.  Comparison of 30-day perioperative outcomes in adults undergoing open versus minimally invasive pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction: analysis of 593 patients in a prospective national database.

Authors:  Julian Hanske; Alejandro Sanchez; Marianne Schmid; Christian P Meyer; Firas Abdollah; Florian Roghmann; Adam S Feldman; Adam S Kibel; Jesse D Sammon; Joachim Noldus; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Jairam R Eswara
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-05-13       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  Comparison of Retrograde Balloon Dilatation and Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty for Treatment of Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction: Results of a 2-Year Follow-Up.

Authors:  Ning Xu; Shao-Hao Chen; Xue-Yi Xue; Qing-Shui Zheng; Yong Wei; Tao Jiang; Xiao-Dong Li; Jin-Bei Huang; Hai Cai
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-03-28       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Use of fibrin glue as a sealant at the anastomotic line in laparoscopic pyeloplasty: A randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Ahmed Farouk; Ahmed Tawfick; Mohamed Kotb; Alaa Abdellmaksoud; Ahmed Safaan; Mohamed Yassin; Hassan Shaker
Journal:  Arab J Urol       Date:  2016-09-23

Review 5.  Current Concepts in Pediatric Robotic Assisted Pyeloplasty.

Authors:  Ramphis A Morales-López; Marcos Pérez-Marchán; Marcos Pérez Brayfield
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2019-01-24       Impact factor: 3.418

Review 6.  An up-to-date overview of minimally invasive treatment methods in ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

Authors:  Rahmi Gokhan Ekin; Orcun Celik; Yusuf Ozlem Ilbey
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2015-06-18
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.