Literature DB >> 22967009

Trends in the treatment of adults with ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

Bruce L Jacobs1, Samuel R Kaufman, Hal Morgenstern, Brent K Hollenbeck, J Stuart Wolf, John M Hollingsworth.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: Minimally invasive pyeloplasty is an effective treatment for patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction that offers quicker convalescence than open pyeloplasty. Technical challenges, however, may have limited its dissemination. We examined population trends and determinants of surgical options for ureteropelvic junction obstruction. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using the State Inpatient and Ambulatory Surgery Databases for Florida, we identified adults who underwent ureteropelvic junction obstruction repair between 2001 and 2009. After determining the surgical approach (minimally invasive pyeloplasty, open pyeloplasty, or endopyelotomy), we estimated annual utilization rates and the effects of patient, surgeon, and hospital predictors on surgery type, using multilevel multinomial logistic regression.
RESULTS: Rates of minimally invasive pyeloplasty increased 360% (P for monotonic trend < 0.01), while rates of open pyeloplasty decreased 56% (P<0.01). Rates of endopyelotomy were substantially higher and remained relatively stable (P=0.27). Compared with open pyeloplasty, minimally invasive pyeloplasty was used more commonly among patients with private insurance (odds ratio [OR] 1.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-2.3), those treated at teaching hospitals (OR 1.6; CI 1.0-2.6), and those treated by high-volume surgeons (OR 2.9; CI 2.0-4.2). Its use was less frequent among patients with multiple comorbidities (OR 0.53; CI 0.37-0.76). Similar associations were observed when comparing receipt of minimally invasive pyeloplasty with endopyelotomy; however, patients who underwent endopyelotomy were older.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of minimally invasive pyeloplasty has dramatically increased, largely replacing open pyeloplasty, while the use of endopyelotomy, albeit significantly more common than the other approaches, has remained stable. The surgical approach is influenced by several patient, surgeon, and hospital factors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22967009      PMCID: PMC3593686          DOI: 10.1089/end.2012.0017

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


  23 in total

1.  Use of new technology in endourology and laparoscopy by american urologists: internet and postal survey.

Authors:  H L Kim; C M Hollowell; R V Patel; G T Bales; R V Clayman; G S Gerber
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2000-11-01       Impact factor: 2.649

2.  Long-term results of Anderson-Hynes pyeloplasty in 180 adults in the era of endourologic procedures.

Authors:  Cağatay Göğüş; Tamer Karamürsel; Zafer Tokatli; Onder Yaman; Erol Ozdiler; Orhan Göğüş
Journal:  Urol Int       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 2.089

3.  Barriers to the diffusion of advanced surgical techniques.

Authors:  Lee Richstone; Louis R Kavoussi
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2008-04-15       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  The effect of the approach to radical prostatectomy on the profitability of hospitals and surgeons.

Authors:  Yair Lotan; Christian Bolenz; Amit Gupta; Timothy Hotze; Richard Ho; Jeffrey A Cadeddu; Claus G Roehrborn
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2009-10-28       Impact factor: 5.588

5.  Neighborhood of residence and incidence of coronary heart disease.

Authors:  A V Diez Roux; S S Merkin; D Arnett; L Chambless; M Massing; F J Nieto; P Sorlie; M Szklo; H A Tyroler; R L Watson
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2001-07-12       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Practice trends in contemporary management of adult ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

Authors:  Robert Marcovich; Avrum I Jacobson; Joel P A Aldana; Benjamin R Lee; Arthur D Smith
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 2.649

7.  Comparison of open versus laparoscopic pyeloplasty techniques in treatment of uretero-pelvic junction obstruction.

Authors:  H Christoph Klingler; Mesut Remzi; Guenter Janetschek; Christian Kratzik; Michael J Marberger
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 20.096

8.  Comparison of open and endourologic approaches to the obstructed ureteropelvic junction.

Authors:  J D Brooks; L R Kavoussi; G M Preminger; W W Schuessler; R G Moore
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 2.649

9.  Diffusion of surgical innovation among patients with kidney cancer.

Authors:  David C Miller; Christopher S Saigal; Mousumi Banerjee; Jan Hanley; Mark S Litwin
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2008-04-15       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Comparing the quality of the suture anastomosis and the learning curves associated with performing open, freehand, and robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in a swine animal model.

Authors:  Carlo C Passerotti; Ana Maria A M S Passerotti; Marcos F Dall'Oglio; Katia R M Leite; Ricardo L V Nunes; Miguel Srougi; Alan B Retik; Hiep T Nguyen
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 6.113

View more
  10 in total

1.  Cost Analysis of Treatments for Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction.

Authors:  Bruce L Jacobs; Rachana Seelam; Julie C Lai; Janet M Hanley; J Stuart Wolf; Brent K Hollenbeck; John M Hollingsworth; Andrew W Dick; Claude M Setodji; Christopher S Saigal
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2017-01-05       Impact factor: 2.942

2.  Hospital-level Variation in the Quality of Benign Inpatient Urologic Surgery.

Authors:  Hilary Zetlen; Kenn B Daratha; Jonathan D Harper; Hunter Wessells; Kenneth P Roberts; John L Gore
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2015-10-27       Impact factor: 2.649

3.  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

Review 4.  Minimally Invasive Techniques for the Management of Adult UPJ Obstruction.

Authors:  Marshall C Strother; Phillip Mucksavage
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 3.092

5.  Variation in the Use of Open Pyeloplasty, Minimally Invasive Pyeloplasty, and Endopyelotomy for the Treatment of Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction in Adults.

Authors:  Bruce L Jacobs; Julie C Lai; Rachana Seelam; Janet M Hanley; J Stuart Wolf; Brent K Hollenbeck; John M Hollingsworth; Andrew W Dick; Claude M Setodji; Christopher S Saigal
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2017-01-05       Impact factor: 2.942

6.  Laparoscopic and robotic ureteral stenosis repair: a multi-institutional experience with a long-term follow-up.

Authors:  Riccardo Schiavina; Stefano Zaramella; Francesco Chessa; Cristian Vincenzo Pultrone; Marco Borghesi; Andrea Minervini; Andrea Cocci; Andrea Chindemi; Alessandro Antonelli; Claudio Simeone; Vincenzo Pagliarulo; Paolo Parma; Alessanrdo Samuelli; Antonio Celia; Bernardino De Concilio; Bernardo Rocco; Elisa De Lorenzis; Gaetano La Manna; Carlo Terrone; Mario Falsaperla; Donato Dente; Angelo Porreca
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2016-05-21

Review 7.  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

8.  Inaugural Readmission Penalties for Total Hip and Total Knee Arthroplasty Procedures Under the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program.

Authors:  Benjamin Y Li; Kenneth L Urish; Bruce L Jacobs; Chang He; Tudor Borza; Yongmei Qin; Hye Sung Min; James M Dupree; Chad Ellimoottil; Brent K Hollenbeck; Mariel S Lavieri; Jonathan E Helm; Ted A Skolarus
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2019-11-01

9.  Surgical approaches for treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction - a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Annemarie Uhlig; Johannes Uhlig; Lutz Trojan; Marc Hinterthaner; Alexander von Hammerstein-Equord; Arne Strauss
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2019-11-11       Impact factor: 2.264

10.  Robot-assisted pyeloplasty: The way forward.

Authors:  Pankaj N Maheshwari; Amandeep M Arora
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2021 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 1.407

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.