Literature DB >> 28365863

Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in the pediatric population: a review of technique, outcomes, complications, and special considerations in infants.

William R Boysen1, Mohan S Gundeti2.   

Abstract

Ureteropelvic junction obstruction is a common condition encountered by the pediatric urologist, and treated with pyeloplasty when indicated. Recent technological advancements and a shift across all surgical fields to embrace minimally invasive surgery have led to increased utilization of minimally invasive pyeloplasty. Conventional laparoscopy is a reasonable choice, but its use is limited by the technical challenges of precise suturing in a confined space and the associated considerable learning curve. Robotic technology has simplified the minimally invasive approach to pyeloplasty, offering enhanced visualization and improved dexterity with a fairly short learning curve. As utilization of robotic pyeloplasty continues to increase, we sought to critically assess the literature on this approach. We begin with a review of the technical aspects of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty including tips for surgical proficiency and patient safety. Outcomes and complications from the contemporary literature are reviewed, as well as special considerations in the pediatric population including infant pyeloplasty, cost concerns, training, and postoperative diversion/drainage.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Minimally invasive surgery; Pediatric urology; Robotic surgery; Ureteropelvic junction obstruction

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28365863     DOI: 10.1007/s00383-017-4082-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int        ISSN: 0179-0358            Impact factor:   1.827


  50 in total

1.  A comparative direct cost analysis of pediatric urologic robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery: could robot-assisted surgery be less expensive?

Authors:  Courtney K Rowe; Michael W Pierce; Katherine C Tecci; Constance S Houck; James Mandell; Alan B Retik; Hiep T Nguyen
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2012-03-14       Impact factor: 2.942

2.  Cost analysis of pediatric robot-assisted and laparoscopic pyeloplasty.

Authors:  Daniel P Casella; Janelle A Fox; Francis X Schneck; Glenn M Cannon; Michael C Ost
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-09-24       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic reoperative repair for failed pyeloplasty in children: a safe and highly effective treatment option.

Authors:  Bruce W Lindgren; Jennifer Hagerty; Theresa Meyer; Earl Y Cheng
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-07-20       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  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

5.  A minimal invasive surgical approach for children of all ages with ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

Authors:  Ulrike Subotic; Imke Rohard; Daniel Max Weber; Rita Gobet; Ueli Moehrlen; Ricardo Gonzalez
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2011-07-29       Impact factor: 1.830

6.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty: Multi-institutional experience in infants.

Authors:  Daniel I Avery; Katherine W Herbst; Thomas S Lendvay; Paul H Noh; Pankaj Dangle; Mohan S Gundeti; Matthew C Steele; Sean T Corbett; Craig A Peters; Christina Kim
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2015-03-12       Impact factor: 1.830

7.  Pediatric Robot-assisted Redo Pyeloplasty With Buccal Mucosa Graft: A Novel Technique.

Authors:  Jennifer J Ahn; Michael E Shapiro; Jonathan S Ellison; Thomas S Lendvay
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2016-12-27       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  Trends in robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in pediatric patients.

Authors:  M Francesca Monn; Clinton D Bahler; Eric B Schneider; Benjamin M Whittam; Rosalia Misseri; Richard C Rink; Chandru P Sundaram
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2013-03-19       Impact factor: 2.649

9.  Can proctoring affect the learning curve of robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty? Experience at a high-volume pediatric robotic surgery center.

Authors:  Diana K Bowen; Bruce W Lindgren; Earl Y Cheng; Edward M Gong
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2016-06-24

10.  Infant robotic pyeloplasty: comparison with an open cohort.

Authors:  D Bansal; N G Cost; W R DeFoor; P P Reddy; E A Minevich; B A Vanderbrink; S Alam; C A Sheldon; P H Noh
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2013-11-09       Impact factor: 1.830

View more
  4 in total

1.  Assistant port is unnecessary for robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children: a comparative cohort study.

Authors:  Yavuz Onur Danacioglu; Ferhat Keser; Salih Polat; Bilal Gunaydin; Yusuf Ilker Comez; Mesrur Selcuk Silay
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 2.003

2.  A Comparison Between Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty in Patients with Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction.

Authors:  Niwat Lukkanawong; Masashi Honda; Shogo Teraoka; Hideto Iwamoto; Shuichi Morizane; Katsuya Hikita; Atsushi Takenaka
Journal:  Yonago Acta Med       Date:  2022-04-15       Impact factor: 1.371

3.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) in children with horseshoe kidneys: results of a multicentric study.

Authors:  Ciro Esposito; Lorenzo Masieri; Thomas Blanc; Gianantonio Manzoni; Selcuk Silay; Maria Escolino
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2019-01-14       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  A retrospective analysis of ureteropelvic junction obstructions in patients with horseshoe kidney.

Authors:  Mohamed Ibrahim Ahmed Elmaadawy; Sang Woon Kim; Sung Ku Kang; Sang Won Han; Yong Seung Lee
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-11
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.