Literature DB >> 24957464

Unstented laparoscopic pyeloplasty in young children (1-5 years old): a comparison with a repair using double-J stent or transanastomotic externalized stent.

Radim Kočvara1, Josef Sedláček2, Marcel Drlík3, Zdeněk Dítě4, Jaromír Běláček5, Vojtěch Fiala6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate feasibility of unstented laparoscopic pyeloplasty in young children to prevent pyelonephritis and second anaesthesia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: During 2006-2013, 70 children (1-5 years old) underwent laparoscopic pyeloplasty for high grade hydronephrosis. Unstented repair was indicated in 34 children (GroupL1), double-J stent was placed in 21 patients (Group L2) and uretero-pyelostomy stent (Cook) in 15 patients (Group L3). Stenting was preferred in large thin-walled pelvis, thin ureter, kidney malrotation, and unfavourable course of crossing vessels. The outcome was compared with age-matched group of 52 children who had open surgery during 1996-2006 (Groups O1, O3).
RESULTS: Operation times were significantly shorter in Groups L1 and L2 than in Group L3; the times were shorter in open repairs. Three patients with crossing vessels from Group L1 had urine leakage and one had obstruction (11.4%). In Group L2, one patient had obstruction, one incorrect placement of the stent, and one girl had serious pyelonephritis (14.3%). In Group L3, displacement of uretero-pyelostomy occurred in one patient (6.7%). There is no statistical difference between laparoscopic groups and between laparoscopic and open groups.
CONCLUSION: Unstented laparoscopic pyeloplasty is a safe procedure in selected young children with favourable anatomical conditions preventing additional anaesthesia and stent-related complications.
Copyright © 2014 Journal of Pediatric Urology Company. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Double-J stent in children; Laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children; Paediatric pyeloplasty; Unstented laparoscopic pyeloplasty; Ureteropelvic junction obstruction

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24957464     DOI: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2014.04.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pediatr Urol        ISSN: 1477-5131            Impact factor:   1.830


  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

Review 2.  Comparing the efficacy and safety between robotic-assisted versus open pyeloplasty in children: a systemic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Shang-Jen Chang; Chun-Kai Hsu; Cheng-Hsing Hsieh; Stephen Shei-Dei Yang
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-03-10       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  Comparison of external stents and DJ stents techniques for pediatric pyeloplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Chunyang Meng; Lijian Gan; Kangsen Li; Lei Peng; Jinze Li; Junbao Yang; Yunxiang Li
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2022-08-25       Impact factor: 3.569

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.  Trans-uretero-cystic external urethral stent for urinary diversion in pediatric laparoscopic pyeloplasty: A novel approach.

Authors:  Jun-Jun Dong; Sheng Wen; Xing Liu; Tao Lin; Feng Liu; Guang-Hui Wei
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-10-16       Impact factor: 1.817

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.