Literature DB >> 22902039

Retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children: long-term outcome and critical analysis of 10-year experience in a teaching center.

Thomas Blanc1, Cecile Muller, Hendy Abdoul, Stoyen Peev, Annabel Paye-Jaouen, Matthieu Peycelon, Elisabeth Carricaburu, Alaa El-Ghoneimi.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children remains controversial and is not included in most pediatric urology centers because of technical difficulties and lack of long-term results.
OBJECTIVE: To critically analyze our 10-yr experience with the retroperitoneal approach (RA), with a particular interest on the impact of the learning curve in a teaching center. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients who underwent pyeloplasty between 1999 and 2010 at our institution were reviewed (n=390). The diagnosis of ureteropelvic junction obstruction was confirmed by ultrasound and technetium Tc 99m mercaptoacetyltriglycine-3 renal scan or magnetic resonance imaging; the same criteria were used to evaluate the outcome. The lateral RA was selected in children >1 yr of age without abnormal migration or fusion of the kidney (n=104). SURGICAL PROCEDURE: Dismembered pyeloplasty and anastomosis were performed using running monofilament 5-0 or 6-0 absorbable suture. All were drained by double-J stent except 20 cases drained by external transanastomotic stent. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We assessed intra- and postoperative morbidity and analyzed the teaching of technique and learning curve. Data are expressed as medians and interquartile range (25th, 75th percentiles) for quantitative variables. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Median age was 6.2 yr (2.2-10.3). Thirty-three patients had crossing vessels. Median operative time was 185 min (160-235). Median hospital stay was 2 d (1-2). Redo pyeloplasty was needed in only two children (2%). Median follow-up was 2.1 yr (1.4-4.1). Operative time was <3 h after 35 cases. After 30 cases performed by the same surgeon, standardization of the technique was feasible, which helped in the teaching process because 50% of the final 30 cases were done by trainees.
CONCLUSIONS: Retroperitoneal dismembered laparoscopic pyeloplasty is a safe, reliable, and efficient procedure with an excellent outcome in selected children according to their indications and age, and the experience of the surgical team. Even if the transmission to trainees is successful, it is still a long learning process and remains a challenging task for a teaching center.
Copyright © 2012. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22902039     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.07.051

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  15 in total

Review 1.  Laparoscopy or retroperitoneoscopy: which is the best approach in pediatric urology?

Authors:  Dimitrios Antoniou; Christos Karetsos
Journal:  Transl Pediatr       Date:  2016-10

2.  National Trends in Secondary Procedures Following Pediatric Pyeloplasty.

Authors:  Geolani W Dy; Ryan S Hsi; Sarah K Holt; Thomas S Lendvay; John L Gore; Jonathan D Harper
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2016-02-28       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 3.  Single-Site Laparoscopy and Robotic Surgery in Pediatric Urology.

Authors:  Diana K Bowen; Jason P Van Batavia; Arun K Srinivasan
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2018-04-17       Impact factor: 3.092

4.  Outcomes after pediatric open, laparoscopic, and robotic pyeloplasty at academic institutions.

Authors:  Yvonne Y Chan; Blythe Durbin-Johnson; Renea M Sturm; Eric A Kurzrock
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2016-10-18       Impact factor: 1.830

5.  Feasibility and safety of magnetic-end double-J ureteral stent insertion and removal in children.

Authors:  Marc Chalhoub; Jules Kohaut; Nicolas Vinit; Nathalie Botto; Yves Aigrain; Yves Héloury; Henri Lottmann; Thomas Blanc
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2020-07-04       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  National Trends in Followup Imaging after Pyeloplasty in Children in the United States.

Authors:  Ryan S Hsi; Sarah K Holt; John L Gore; Thomas S Lendvay; Jonathan D Harper
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2015-04-11       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  How to successfully implement a robotic pediatric surgery program: lessons learned after 96 procedures.

Authors:  Guénolée de Lambert; Laurent Fourcade; Joachim Centi; Fabien Fredon; Karim Braik; Caroline Szwarc; Bernard Longis; Hubert Lardy
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-01-26       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Transurethral Retrograde Fishing the Double J Urethral Stent: A Tertiary Children Hospital's Experience With a New Technical Strategy.

Authors:  Chengjun Yu; Chun Wei; Junjun Dong; Xingyue He; Yi Wei; Sheng Wen; Tao Lin; Dawei He; Shengde Wu; Guanghui Wei
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 3.418

9.  Follow-up imaging after pediatric pyeloplasty.

Authors:  Manoj Kumar; Sanjeet Kumar Singh; Sohrab Arora; Varun Mittal; Nitesh Patidar; Sanjoy Kumar Sureka; M S Ansari
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2016 Jul-Sep

10.  Reflective Practice About Retroperitoneal Laparoscopy in Comparison to Open Surgery for Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction Repair in Children Less Than 1 Year of Age.

Authors:  Anthony Kallas-Chemaly; Matthieu Peycelon; Liza Ali; Christine Grapin-Dagorno; Elisabeth Carricaburu; Pascale Philippe-Chomette; Goharig Enezian; Annabel Paye-Jaouen; Alaa El-Ghoneimi
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2019-05-24       Impact factor: 3.418

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.