Filippos Kapogiannis1,2, Eleftherios Spartalis2,3, Konstantinos Fasoulakis4, Gerasimos Tsourouflis2,3, Dimitrios Dimitroulis2,3, Nikolaos I Nikiteas2,3. 1. Department of Urology, Hippokrateion Hospital, Athens, Greece kapogiannis.phil@gmail.com. 2. Hellenic Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery (MIRS) Study Group, Athens Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece. 3. Second Department of Propaedeutic Surgery, Laiko Hospital, Athens Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece. 4. Department of Urology, Hippokrateion Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM: The aim of this review was to provide an update on the status of minimal invasive treatment of ureteral stricture either with a laparoscopic or robotic surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eligible studies, published until November 2019 were retrieved through Medline, Cochrane and Pubmed databases. Predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria were used as selection method for data synthesis and acquisition. The study was performed in accordance with the PRISMA statement. RESULTS: A total of 19 retrospective studies met the inclusion criteria. All of them demonstrated the safety, feasibility and success of both laparoscopic and robotic ureteral reconstruction. Individual case series or cumulative comparison analysis of the available studies showed at least equivalent success rates and a trend favoring laparoscopic and robotic groups in terms of estimated blood loss and length of hospital stay to the detriment of longer operative times and possibly higher cost. CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests the effectiveness, safety and increasing incorporation of minimally invasive techniques for complex stricture repair and reconstruction. Copyright
BACKGROUND/AIM: The aim of this review was to provide an update on the status of minimal invasive treatment of ureteral stricture either with a laparoscopic or robotic surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eligible studies, published until November 2019 were retrieved through Medline, Cochrane and Pubmed databases. Predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria were used as selection method for data synthesis and acquisition. The study was performed in accordance with the PRISMA statement. RESULTS: A total of 19 retrospective studies met the inclusion criteria. All of them demonstrated the safety, feasibility and success of both laparoscopic and robotic ureteral reconstruction. Individual case series or cumulative comparison analysis of the available studies showed at least equivalent success rates and a trend favoring laparoscopic and robotic groups in terms of estimated blood loss and length of hospital stay to the detriment of longer operative times and possibly higher cost. CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests the effectiveness, safety and increasing incorporation of minimally invasive techniques for complex stricture repair and reconstruction. Copyright