Literature DB >> 21413878

National practice and outcomes of laparoscopic pyeloplasty in the United Kingdom.

Karyee Chow1, Adebanji A B Adeyoju.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: Laparoscopic pyeloplasty is now widely practiced in the United Kingdom and considered the gold standard in the treatment of patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction. The aim of this audit was to determine the national practice and outcomes for this procedure. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The British Association of Urological Surgeons sent out standardized audit proformas in May 2008 to units across the United Kingdom inviting surgeons who were performing laparoscopic pyeloplasties to submit their results over the last 4 years. Data on the presentation, preoperative investigations, intra-perative details, and postoperative follow-up were collected centrally and inserted into a national database for analysis.
RESULTS: There were 323 returns from a total of 30 surgeons. At a median follow-up of 4 months (1-24), the overall symptomatic and renographic failure rates were 10.3% and 8.7%, respectively. Mean operative time was 181 minutes (3--425 min); there were 18 (6%) conversions, 33 (10.5%) complications, and one (0.3%) mortality. Surgeons who submitted 10 or more returns had a lower conversion rate than surgeons submitting fewer than 10 (2.9% vs 14.7%). The median hospital stay was 3 days (1-34 d). There was no difference in failure and complication rate for the retroperitoneal and transperitoneal approaches, although the conversion rate was higher with the retroperitoneal approach.
CONCLUSIONS: The results show that laparoscopic pyeloplasty, although achieving acceptable outcomes at a national level in the United Kingdom, had areas of practice that could be improved. It highlights the importance of a high-volume practice in achieving optimum results and the potential problems associated with the retroperitoneal approach.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21413878     DOI: 10.1089/end.2010.0505

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


  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.  [Pyeloplasty: pro laparoscopic].

Authors:  P Bader
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 0.639

3.  Comparison of outcomes between 2 week versus 4 week stenting in pediatric pyeloplasty-A single centre observational study.

Authors:  Santosh Dey; Venkat Shankar Raman; Tarun Peela; Karunesh Chand; Naveen Chandra
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2019-11-02

4.  Ureteral obstruction swine model through laparoscopy and single port for training on laparoscopic pyeloplasty.

Authors:  Idoia Díaz-Güemes Martín-Portugués; Laura Hernández-Hurtado; Jesús Usón-Casaús; Miguel Angel Sánchez-Hurtado; Francisco Miguel Sánchez-Margallo
Journal:  Int J Med Sci       Date:  2013-06-21       Impact factor: 3.738

5.  A modification with threading cannula needle-assisted 4-point suspension fixation for retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children with ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a cohort study in single center.

Authors:  Ke Li; Cheng Hu; Wentao Huang; Jie Si-Tu; Li Lu; Yunhua Mao; Huimin Zhang; Jianguang Qiu; Dejuan Wang
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2018-12-05       Impact factor: 2.370

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.