Weifeng Xu1, Hanzhong Li2, Zhigang Ji1, Xuebin Zhang3, Yushi Zhang3, He Xiao3, Guanghua Liu3. 1. Department of Urology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science and Peking Union Medical College,Beijing 100730, China. 2. Department of Urology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science and Peking Union Medical College,Beijing 100730, China. Email: lihanzhong@medmail.com.cn. 3. Department of Urology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical outcomes of three dimensional (3D) and traditional two dimentional (2D) laparoscopic pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). METHODS: Clinical data on 31 patients who underwent retroperitoneoscopic pyeloplasty for UPJO in Peking Union Medical Hospital from January 2013 to March 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 16 male and 15 female patients, and the age ranged from 21 to 42 years, mean (30 ± 6) years. The lesions of 20 cases were located on the left side and 11 cases on the right side. All cases were diagnosed as UPJO by B ultrasound and computed tomography urography (CTU). According to 3D or 2D laparoscopy, these patients were divided into two groups. The 3D laparoscopy group included 16 cases, who received 3D retroperitoneoscopic pyeloplasty. The 2D laparoscopy group included 15 cases, who received traditional 2D retroperitoneoscopic pyeloplasty. Demographic data (gender, age, laterality, body mass index), perioperative indexes and clinical outcomes (operative time, estimated blood loss , postoperative hospital stay, total hospitalization charge) were collected and compared between two groups.Numerical demographic and perioperative data were analyzed by using Student's t-test. Categorical data were compared using Pearson's Chi-square test. RESULTS: All operations were completed successfully without open convertion.In the 3D laparoscopy group operative time was significantly shorter than 2D laparoscopy group ((106 ± 16) minutes vs. (124 ± 24) minutes, t = 5.993, P = 0.021) . There were no significant difference between two groups on the estimated blood loss ((54 ± 14) ml vs. (57 ± 16) ml, t = 0.285, P = 0.598), postoperative hospital stay ((7.3 ± 0.7) days vs. (7.5 ± 0.6) days, t = 1.415, P = 0.244), incidence of postoperative complications (0/16 vs. 1/15, χ(2) = 1.102, P = 0.484) and total hospitalization charge ((25 687 ± 3 032) RMB vs. (25 426 ± 2 626) RMB, t = 0.065, P = 0.800) . All patients were followed up from 3 to 12 months (mean 6 months).Ureteropelvic junction stricture recurred in 2 cases respectively from 3D laparoscopic group and traditional laparoscopic group. Both were cured. CONCLUSIONS: 3D laparoscopic pyeloplasty is safe and feasible. Compared with the traditional 2D laparoscopic technology, 3D laparoscopy technology reduces the operation difficulty and shortens the operative time.
OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical outcomes of three dimensional (3D) and traditional two dimentional (2D) laparoscopic pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). METHODS: Clinical data on 31 patients who underwent retroperitoneoscopic pyeloplasty for UPJO in Peking Union Medical Hospital from January 2013 to March 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 16 male and 15 female patients, and the age ranged from 21 to 42 years, mean (30 ± 6) years. The lesions of 20 cases were located on the left side and 11 cases on the right side. All cases were diagnosed as UPJO by B ultrasound and computed tomography urography (CTU). According to 3D or 2D laparoscopy, these patients were divided into two groups. The 3D laparoscopy group included 16 cases, who received 3D retroperitoneoscopic pyeloplasty. The 2D laparoscopy group included 15 cases, who received traditional 2D retroperitoneoscopic pyeloplasty. Demographic data (gender, age, laterality, body mass index), perioperative indexes and clinical outcomes (operative time, estimated blood loss , postoperative hospital stay, total hospitalization charge) were collected and compared between two groups.Numerical demographic and perioperative data were analyzed by using Student's t-test. Categorical data were compared using Pearson's Chi-square test. RESULTS: All operations were completed successfully without open convertion.In the 3D laparoscopy group operative time was significantly shorter than 2D laparoscopy group ((106 ± 16) minutes vs. (124 ± 24) minutes, t = 5.993, P = 0.021) . There were no significant difference between two groups on the estimated blood loss ((54 ± 14) ml vs. (57 ± 16) ml, t = 0.285, P = 0.598), postoperative hospital stay ((7.3 ± 0.7) days vs. (7.5 ± 0.6) days, t = 1.415, P = 0.244), incidence of postoperative complications (0/16 vs. 1/15, χ(2) = 1.102, P = 0.484) and total hospitalization charge ((25 687 ± 3 032) RMB vs. (25 426 ± 2 626) RMB, t = 0.065, P = 0.800) . All patients were followed up from 3 to 12 months (mean 6 months).Ureteropelvic junction stricture recurred in 2 cases respectively from 3D laparoscopic group and traditional laparoscopic group. Both were cured. CONCLUSIONS: 3D laparoscopic pyeloplasty is safe and feasible. Compared with the traditional 2D laparoscopic technology, 3D laparoscopy technology reduces the operation difficulty and shortens the operative time.