PURPOSE: Failure after pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children may occur in up to 10% of cases. Therapeutic options include Double-J® stent placement, endoscopic treatment and reoperation. Laparoscopic and robotic reoperative modalities seem safe and efficacious, although pediatric series are limited in the literature. We report the largest known series of reoperative laparoscopic ureteropelvic junction obstruction repair in children and compare this approach to primary laparoscopic pyeloplasty. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed all children undergoing laparoscopic pyeloplasty at a single institution from 2004 to 2015. Reoperative laparoscopic ureteropelvic junction obstruction repair was compared to primary pyeloplasty. Groups were analyzed regarding demographics, operative time, complications, length of hospital stay and success, defined by improvement of symptoms, ultrasound and renogram. RESULTS: We identified 11 cases of reoperation (8 redo pyeloplasties and 3 ureterocalycostomies) and 71 primary pyeloplasties. Groups were not different in age, gender or weight. Median followup was 37 months. Median time between primary pyeloplasty and reoperation was 34 months. Median operative time was 205 minutes for the reoperative group and 200 for primary pyeloplasty (p = 0.98). Length of stay was longer in the reoperative group (p = 0.049), although no major complications were recorded in this group. All reoperative cases and 96% of primary pyeloplasty cases remained asymptomatic following surgery (p = 0.99). Postoperative improvement was similar for both groups on ultrasound (90% for reoperation vs 92% for primary pyeloplasty, p = 0.99) and renogram (80% vs 88%, p = 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopy seems to be safe and effective for management of failed pyeloplasty in children. Based on our data, reoperation is as safe and effective as primary pyeloplasty.
PURPOSE: Failure after pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children may occur in up to 10% of cases. Therapeutic options include Double-J® stent placement, endoscopic treatment and reoperation. Laparoscopic and robotic reoperative modalities seem safe and efficacious, although pediatric series are limited in the literature. We report the largest known series of reoperative laparoscopic ureteropelvic junction obstruction repair in children and compare this approach to primary laparoscopic pyeloplasty. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed all children undergoing laparoscopic pyeloplasty at a single institution from 2004 to 2015. Reoperative laparoscopic ureteropelvic junction obstruction repair was compared to primary pyeloplasty. Groups were analyzed regarding demographics, operative time, complications, length of hospital stay and success, defined by improvement of symptoms, ultrasound and renogram. RESULTS: We identified 11 cases of reoperation (8 redo pyeloplasties and 3 ureterocalycostomies) and 71 primary pyeloplasties. Groups were not different in age, gender or weight. Median followup was 37 months. Median time between primary pyeloplasty and reoperation was 34 months. Median operative time was 205 minutes for the reoperative group and 200 for primary pyeloplasty (p = 0.98). Length of stay was longer in the reoperative group (p = 0.049), although no major complications were recorded in this group. All reoperative cases and 96% of primary pyeloplasty cases remained asymptomatic following surgery (p = 0.99). Postoperative improvement was similar for both groups on ultrasound (90% for reoperation vs 92% for primary pyeloplasty, p = 0.99) and renogram (80% vs 88%, p = 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopy seems to be safe and effective for management of failed pyeloplasty in children. Based on our data, reoperation is as safe and effective as primary pyeloplasty.