Literature DB >> 27140001

Open versus minimally invasive ureteroneocystostomy: A population-level analysis.

Hsin-Hsiao S Wang1, Rohit Tejwani1, Glenn M Cannon2, Patricio C Gargollo3, John S Wiener1, Jonathan C Routh4.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Open ureteroneocystostomy (UNC) is the gold standard for surgical correction of vesicoureteral reflux (VUR). Beyond single-center reports, there are few published data on outcomes of minimally-invasive (MIS) UNC. Our objective was to compare postoperative outcomes of open and MIS UNC using national, population-level data.
METHOD: We reviewed the 1998-2012 Nationwide Inpatient Sample to identify pediatric (≤18 years) VUR patients who underwent either open or MIS UNC. Demographics, National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) complications, length of stay (LOS), and cost data were extracted. Statistical analysis was performed using weighted, hierarchical multivariate logistic regression (complications) and negative binomial regression (LOS, cost).
RESULTS: We identified 780 MIS and 75,976 open UNC admissions. Compared with patients undergoing open UNC, patients who underwent MIS UNC were likely to be older (6.2 versus 4.8 years, p < 0.001), publically insured (43 versus 26%, p < 0.001), and treated in recent years (90 versus 46% after 2005, p < 0.001). MIS admissions were associated with a significantly shorter length of stay (1.0 versus 1.8 days, p < 0.001) and higher cost ($9230 versus $6,304, p = 0.002). After adjusting for patient-level confounders (age, gender, insurance, treatment year, and comorbidity), and hospital-level factors (region, bedsize, and teaching status), MIS UNC was associated with a significantly higher rate of postoperative urinary complications such as UTIs, urinary retention, and renal injury (OR 3.1, p = 0.02), shorter LOS (RR 0.8, p = 0.02), and higher cost (RR 1.4, p = 0.008). DISCUSSION: Strengths of this study are its large cohort size, long time horizon, national estimation, and cost data. Most prior studies are case-series limited to the size of the institutional cohort. Our analysis of 76,756 operative encounters revealed that open UNC continues to be performed at far greater frequency than MIS UNC, outpacing the latter modality by nearly 100:1. Children treated with MIS UNC had three times greater odds of developing postoperative urinary complications, and MIS UNC patients incurred average costs per admission that were nearly 1.5 times higher than those of children who underwent open UNC. These children were also likely to be older, publically insured, and treated in more recent years. On the other hand, patients treated with MIS UNC required substantially shorter postoperative hospitalization, with an average LOS roughly half that of open UNC cases. Limitations include the retrospective nature of the administrative database, lack of detailed patient-level data, and no available long-term postoperative outcomes. Compared with open surgery, MIS UNC was associated with shorter LOS but higher costs and possibly higher urinary complication rates.
Copyright © 2016 Journal of Pediatric Urology Company. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Complication; Minimally invasive; Surgery; Ureteroneocystostomy; Vesicoureteral reflux

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27140001      PMCID: PMC5012942          DOI: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2016.03.014

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


  31 in total

1.  Open, laparoscopic, and robotic ureteroneocystotomy for benign and malignant ureteral lesions: a comparison of over 100 minimally invasive cases.

Authors:  Sammy E Elsamra; Nithin Theckumparampil; Bradley Garden; Manaf Alom; Nikhil Waingankar; David A Leavitt; Jessica Kreshover; Michael Schwartz; Louis R Kavoussi; Lee Richstone
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 2.942

2.  An operative technique for the correction of vesicoureteral reflux.

Authors:  V A POLITANO; W F LEADBETTER
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1958-06       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Parent and patient perceptions of robotic vs open urological surgery scars in children.

Authors:  Joao A B A Barbosa; Ghassan Barayan; Chad M Gridley; Daniela C J Sanchez; Carlo C Passerotti; Constance S Houck; Hiep T Nguyen
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-12-28       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Prospective long-term analysis of nerve-sparing extravesical robotic-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation.

Authors:  Sanjay Kasturi; Shailen S Sehgal; Matthew S Christman; Sarah M Lambert; Pasquale Casale
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2011-12-23       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 5.  Summary of the AUA Guideline on Management of Primary Vesicoureteral Reflux in Children.

Authors:  Craig A Peters; Steven J Skoog; Billy S Arant; Hillary L Copp; Jack S Elder; R Guy Hudson; Antoine E Khoury; Armando J Lorenzo; Hans G Pohl; Ellen Shapiro; Warren T Snodgrass; Mireya Diaz
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2010-07-21       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  The demographics and costs of inpatient vesicoureteral reflux management in the USA.

Authors:  John David Spencer; Andrew Schwaderer; Kirk McHugh; Brian Vanderbrink; Brian Becknell; David S Hains
Journal:  Pediatr Nephrol       Date:  2011-05-10       Impact factor: 3.714

7.  Vesicoureteral reflux and ureteroceles.

Authors:  Hans G Pohl; Geoffrey F Joyce; Matthew Wise; Bartley G Cilento
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Renal scarring and vesicoureteric reflux.

Authors:  K J Shah; D G Robins; R H White
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1978-03       Impact factor: 3.791

Review 9.  Surgical management of vesicoureteral reflux in pediatric patients.

Authors:  Axel Heidenreich; Enver Ozgur; Tanja Becker; Gerald Haupt
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2004-06-18       Impact factor: 4.226

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Robotic Ureteral Reimplant-the Current Role.

Authors:  Rajeev Chaudhry; Heidi A Stephany
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.092

2.  Parental Preferences for Vesicoureteral Reflux Treatment: A Crowd-sourced, Best-worst Scaling Study.

Authors:  Zachary R Dionise; Juan Marcos Gonzalez; Michael L Garcia-Roig; Andrew J Kirsch; Charles D Scales; John S Wiener; J Todd Purves; Jonathan C Routh
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2019-03-14       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 3.  Management of Vesicoureteral Reflux: What Have We Learned Over the Last 20 Years?

Authors:  Göran Läckgren; Christopher S Cooper; Tryggve Neveus; Andrew J Kirsch
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2021-03-31       Impact factor: 3.418

4.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplant: A single-center experience.

Authors:  Vipin Tyagi; Mrinal Pahwa; Praveen Lodha; Tejas Mistry; Sudhir Chadha
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2021-01-01

5.  Relative to open surgery, minimally-invasive renal and ureteral pediatric surgery offers no improvement in 30-day complications, yet requires longer operative time: Data from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Pediatrics.

Authors:  Marc Colaco; Austin Hester; William Visser; Alison Rasper; Ryan Terlecki
Journal:  Investig Clin Urol       Date:  2018-04-10
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.