Literature DB >> 21527195

Simplified open approach to surgical treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction in young children and infants.

Eduardo Ruiz1, Ricardo Soria, Edurne Ormaechea, Mauricio Marcelo Urquizo Lino, Juan Manuel Moldes, Francisco Ignacio de Badiola.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Indications for laparoscopic pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction are steadily growing but there is still a group of young children in whom open surgery continues to be the procedure most performed by pediatric urologists. We report our results in young children and infants with dismembered pyeloplasty done through a small flank incision on an outpatient basis or during a short hospital stay.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between April 2001 and July 2009, 45 patients with a median age of 11.2 months (range 1 to 50), of whom 72.9% were male, with confirmed ureteropelvic junction obstruction underwent classic Anderson-Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty thorough a 2.5 to 3.5 cm flank incision. Obstruction was on the left side in 51.2% of the patients. Pyeloureteral anastomosis was performed with a continuous 7-zero polydioxanone suture over a 7Fr multiperforated pyelostomy self-designed catheter in 89% of the patients. A Double-J® catheter was used in only 4 patients with other associated conditions. The stent was removed in the office 7 to 12 days after surgery.
RESULTS: Mean operative time was 92 minutes (range 60 to 150). Median hospital stay was 11.5 hours (range 6 to 35) in the whole group but it decreased to 9.4 hours in the last 22 cases. There was no reoperation due to recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Mean postoperative followup was 47.5 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Ureteropelvic junction obstruction surgery in small children can be done safely through a small incision with a short hospital stay without morbidity and with good cosmesis. We believe that open pyeloplasty will continue to be the best standard treatment for ureteropelvic junction obstruction surgery in small children until miniaturization and better laparoscopic instruments allow us to reproduce these results.
Copyright © 2011 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21527195     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.01.012

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


  5 in total

1.  Impact of drainage technique on pediatric pyeloplasty: Comparative analysis of externalized uretero-pyelostomy versus double-J internal stents.

Authors:  Linda C Lee; Niki Kanaroglou; Joseph M Gleason; Joao L Pippi Salle; Darius J Bägli; Martin A Koyle; Armando J Lorenzo
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2015 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  Comparative, Prospective, Case-Control Study of Open versus Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty in Children with Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction: Long-term Results.

Authors:  Lisandro A Piaggio; Juan P Corbetta; Santiago Weller; Ricardo Augusto Dingevan; Víctor Duran; Javier Ruiz; Juan C Lopez
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 3.418

3.  [A Retrospective Study of Microporous Polysaccharide Hemostatic Powder Combined with Other Repair Materials for Reducing Postoperative Pulmonary Air Leakage during Pulmonary Segmentectomy].

Authors:  Wang Zhang; Honglei Xu; Wei Wen; Jun Wang; Liang Chen; Quan Zhu
Journal:  Zhongguo Fei Ai Za Zhi       Date:  2020-10-20

4.  The BULT Method for Pediatric Minilaparoscopic Pyeloplasty in Infants: Technique and Results.

Authors:  Barbara Magda Ludwikowski; Michael Botländer; Ricardo González
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2016-05-25       Impact factor: 3.418

5.  Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty in children: experience of 226 cases at one centre.

Authors:  Marcin Polok; Dominika Borselle; Krystian Toczewski; Wojciech Apoznański; Diana Jędrzejuk; Dariusz Patkowski
Journal:  Arch Med Sci       Date:  2019-04-12       Impact factor: 3.318

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.