Literature DB >> 29206567

Comparison of Robotic Pyeloplasty and Standard Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty in Infants: A Bi-Institutional Study.

Amos Neheman1, Eyal Kord1, Amnon Zisman1, Abd Elhalim Darawsha2, Paul H Noh3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare outcomes between robotic pyeloplasty (RP) and standard laparoscopic pyeloplasty (LP) in the infant population for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of all children under 1 year of age who underwent RP or LP at two different medical centers between October 2009 and February 2016. Patient demographics, perioperative data, complications, and results were reviewed.
RESULTS: Thirteen patients underwent standard LP, and 21 patients underwent RP during the study period. Median age and median weight at time of operation for the whole cohort were 6.1 months and 7.9 kg. Surgery success rates were similar with 95% and 92% in RP and LP, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in operating time between the 2 groups, with a median time of 156 minutes in RP (range 125-249) and 192 minutes (range 98-229) in standard LP (P = .35). Median length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the robotic group with a median stay of 1 day (range 1-3) and 7 days (range 7-12) in the standard LP group.(P < .0001) Drains or nephrostomy tubes were used more often in the laparoscopic group (100%, 13/13) as opposed to RP (9.5%, 2/21, P < .0001) There was a comparable complication rate between the 2 groups, 30.8% for LP and 23.8% for RP (P = .65).
CONCLUSIONS: The minimally invasive dismembered pyeloplasty is safe and effective in the infant population and produces high success rates. The results, complication rates, and operative time were comparable between the two surgical methods while the standard LP demonstrated longer hospital stay. Both the robotic approach and the LP can be successfully utilized for the benefit of infants with UPJ obstruction.

Entities:  

Keywords:  laparoscopy; pediatrics; pyeloplasty; robotic surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29206567     DOI: 10.1089/lap.2017.0262

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A        ISSN: 1092-6429            Impact factor:   1.878


  4 in total

1.  Laparoscopic and robotic pyeloplasty as minimally invasive alternatives to the open approach for the treatment of uretero-pelvic junction obstruction in infants: a multi-institutional comparison of outcomes and learning curves.

Authors:  C Andolfi; A M Lombardo; J Aizen; X Recabal; J P Walker; N S Barashi; F Reed; P J Lopez; D T Wilcox; M S Gundeti
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2022-01-19       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty with the use of the Contour™ stent: description of the technique and analysis of outcomes after the first 30 cases.

Authors:  Franco Gaboardi; Guglielmo Mantica; Salvatore Smelzo; Giovannalberto Pini; Davide De Marchi; Giovanni Passaretti; Giuseppe Saitta; Lorenzo Rigatti; Nazareno Suardi
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2019-01-04

3.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty versus laparoscopic pyeloplasty for pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction in the paediatric population: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Samih Taktak; Oliver Llewellyn; Mohamed Aboelsoud; Shahab Hajibandeh; Shahin Hajibandeh
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2019-03-22

Review 4.  Comparison Between Robotic and Laparoscopic or Open Anastomoses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Ioannis D Kostakis; Harkiran Sran; Raphael Uwechue; Pankaj Chandak; Jonathon Olsburgh; Nizam Mamode; Ioannis Loukopoulos; Nicos Kessaris
Journal:  Robot Surg       Date:  2019-12-23
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.