Literature DB >> 26880414

Use of Pediatric Open, Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Ureteral Reimplantation in the United States: 2000 to 2012.

Diana K Bowen1, Mark A Faasse1, Dennis B Liu1, Edward M Gong1, Bruce W Lindgren1, Emilie K Johnson2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We characterize the use of pediatric open, laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation in the United States from 2000 to 2012.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the Kids' Inpatient Database to identify patients who underwent ureteral reimplantation for primary vesicoureteral reflux. Before 2009 laparoscopic ureteral reimplantion and robot-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation were referred to together as minimally invasive ureteral reimplantation. A detailed analysis of open vs robot-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation was performed for 2009 and 2012.
RESULTS: A total of 14,581 ureteral reimplantations were performed. The number of ureteral reimplantations yearly decreased by 14.3%. However, the proportion of minimally invasive ureteral reimplantations increased from 0.3% to 6.3%. A total of 125 robot-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantations were performed in 2012 (81.2% of minimally invasive ureteral reimplantations), representing 5.1% of all ureteral reimplantations, compared to 3.8% in 2009. In 2009 and 2012 mean ± SD patient age was 5.7 ± 3.6 years for robot-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation and 4.3 ± 3.3 years for open reimplantation (p <0.0001). Mean ± SD length of hospitalization was 1.6 ± 1.3 days for robot-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation and 2.4 ± 2.6 for open reimplantation (p <0.0001). Median charges were $22,703 for open and $32,409 for robot-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation (p <0.0001). These relationships maintained significance on multivariate analyses. On multivariate analysis robot-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation use was associated with public insurance status (p = 0.04) and geographic region outside of the southern United States (p = 0.02). Only 50 of 456 hospitals used both approaches (open and robotic), and only 6 hospitals reported 5 or more robot-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantations during 2012.
CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of primary vesicoureteral reflux with ureteral reimplantation is decreasing. Robot-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation is becoming more prevalent but remains relatively uncommon. Length of stay is shorter for the robotic approach but the costs are higher. Nationally robot-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation appears to still be in the early phase of adoption and is clustered at a small number of hospitals.
Copyright © 2016 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  pediatrics; replantation; robotics; urologic surgical procedures; vesico-ureteral reflux

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26880414     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.065

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


  9 in total

1.  Instituting robotic pediatric urologic surgery in the Canadian healthcare system: Evaluating the feasibility and outcomes of robot-assisted pyeloplasty and ureteric reimplantation.

Authors:  Noah Stern; Peter Wang; Sumit Dave
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2021-04       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 2.  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

3.  Has the robot caught up? National trends in utilization, perioperative outcomes, and cost for open, laparoscopic, and robotic pediatric pyeloplasty in the United States from 2003 to 2015.

Authors:  Briony K Varda; Ye Wang; Benjamin I Chung; Richard S Lee; Michael P Kurtz; Caleb P Nelson; Steven L Chang
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2018-02-22       Impact factor: 1.830

Review 4.  Global trends in paediatric robot-assisted urological surgery: a bibliometric and Progressive Scholarly Acceptance analysis.

Authors:  Thomas P Cundy; Simon J D Harley; Hani J Marcus; Archie Hughes-Hallett; Sanjeev Khurana
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2017-04-28

Review 5.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic versus open ureteral reimplantation for pediatric vesicoureteral reflux: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Tuo Deng; Bing Liu; Lianmin Luo; Xiaolu Duan; Chao Cai; Zhijian Zhao; Wei Zhu; Wenqi Wu; Guohua Zeng
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-01-27       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 6.  Lessons learned over a decade of pediatric robotic ureteral reimplantation.

Authors:  Minki Baek; Chester J Koh
Journal:  Investig Clin Urol       Date:  2017-01-09

Review 7.  Robot-assisted ureteral reconstruction - current status and future directions.

Authors:  Paurush Babbar; Nitin Yerram; Andrew Sun; Sij Hemal; Prithvi Murthy; Darren Bryk; Naveen Nandanan; Yaw Nyame; Maxx Caveney; Ryan Nelson; Ryan Berglund
Journal:  Urol Ann       Date:  2018 Jan-Mar

Review 8.  Robotic surgery in pediatric urology.

Authors:  Adam Howe; Zachary Kozel; Lane Palmer
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2016-09-06

Review 9.  Managing vesicoureteral reflux in children: making sense of all the data.

Authors:  Angelena Edwards; Craig A Peters
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2019-01-08
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.