Literature DB >> 20639039

Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty in children: preliminary report of a prospective randomized trial.

Heidi A Penn1, John M Gatti, Sara M Hoestje, Romano T DeMarco, Charles L Snyder, J Patrick Murphy.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children has traditionally been performed using an open technique. Although laparoscopic pyeloplasty has been shown to be comparable and possibly superior to open pyeloplasty in adult studies, such results in the pediatric population are limited. We evaluated outcomes between transperitoneal laparoscopic and open pyeloplasty in children.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: All children 1 to 18 years old with ureteropelvic junction obstruction requiring operative repair were offered enrollment in the study. Patients were prospectively randomized to either transperitoneal laparoscopic or open pyeloplasty through a flank incision.
RESULTS: We reviewed 20 patients (mean age 7.8 years) who underwent laparoscopy and 19 (7.2 years) who underwent open surgery (p = 0.48). Mean followup was similar between the groups (laparoscopic 8.1 months vs open 11.1 months, p = 0.38). Mean operative time was 151 minutes (range 94 to 213) for laparoscopy and 130 minutes (83 to 225) for open surgery (p = 0.09). Mean hospitalization was 29.3 hours (range 20.5 to 48) for laparoscopy and 36.2 hours (24 to 73) for open surgery (p = 0.06). Analgesic usage was similar between the groups. One failure in the open arm required a revision. Operative, hospital, anesthetic and total charges were similar between the groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic pyeloplasty appears to be a safe and effective alternative to open pyeloplasty in children. Although the cost is similar, there is a trend toward longer operative times in the laparoscopic group but a shorter overall hospitalization. As more patients are enrolled in the study, these differences may prove significant. Copyright (c) 2010 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20639039     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.03.062

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


  14 in total

1.  Prospective cost analysis of laparoscopic vs. open pyeloplasty in children: Single centre contemporary evaluation comparing two procedures over a 1-year period.

Authors:  Katherine Moore; Armando J Lorenzo; Suzanne Turner; Darius J Bägli; Joao L Pippi Salle; Walid A Farhat
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 2.  Surgical Approaches to Pediatric Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction.

Authors:  Ryan W Tubre; John M Gatti
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 3.092

3.  Assessing the effects of modality of surgery on postoperative weight loss in patients undergoing partial nephrectomy.

Authors:  Homayoun Zargar; Oktay Akca; Peter Caputo; Daniel Ramirez; Onder Kara; Hiury S Andrade; Robert J Stein; Jihad H Kaouk
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-06-07       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  An updated meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children.

Authors:  Yidong Huang; Yang Wu; Wei Shan; Li Zeng; Lugang Huang
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-04-15

5.  Robotics in urology.

Authors:  Luke A McGuinness; Bhavan Prasad Rai
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 1.891

6.  Dismembered and non-dismembered retroperitoneoscopic pyeloplasty for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children.

Authors:  Svetozar Subotic; Hagen Weiss; Stephen Wyler; Cyrill A Rentsch; Jens Rassweiler; Alexander Bachmann; Dogu Teber
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2012-05-22       Impact factor: 4.226

7.  Comparison of surgical and functional outcomes of open, laparoscopic and robotic pyeloplasty for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

Authors:  Cem Başataç; Uğur Boylu; Fikret Fatih Önol; Eyüp Gümüş
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2014-03

8.  National trends of perioperative outcomes and costs for open, laparoscopic and robotic pediatric pyeloplasty.

Authors:  Briony K Varda; Emilie K Johnson; Curtis Clark; Benjamin I Chung; Caleb P Nelson; Steven L Chang
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2013-10-25       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Laparoscopic and robotic pyeloplasty as minimally invasive alternatives to the open approach for the treatment of uretero-pelvic junction obstruction in infants: a multi-institutional comparison of outcomes and learning curves.

Authors:  C Andolfi; A M Lombardo; J Aizen; X Recabal; J P Walker; N S Barashi; F Reed; P J Lopez; D T Wilcox; M S Gundeti
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2022-01-19       Impact factor: 4.226

10.  Pediatric laparoscopy: Facts and factitious claims.

Authors:  V Raveenthiran
Journal:  J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg       Date:  2010-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.