Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: current status

被引:170
作者
Inagaki, T [1 ]
Rha, KH [1 ]
Ong, AM [1 ]
Kavoussi, LR [1 ]
Jarrett, TW [1 ]
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Med Inst, James Buchanan Brady Urol Inst, Baltimore, MD 21205 USA
关键词
laparoscopy; pyeloplasty; pelvi-ureteric obstruction;
D O I
10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05208.x
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE To review current publications and report our results and long-term follow-up of laparoscopic transperitoneal pyeloplasty for pelvi-ureteric junction (PUJ) obstruction. PATIENTS AND METHODS In all, 147 laparoscopic transperitoneal pyeloplasties were performed between August 1993 and November 2000 (mean patient age 35.7 years, range 10-85). All patients were diagnosed with PUJ obstruction by symptoms and intravenous urography, radionuclide diuretic renography or ultrasonography. An Anderson-Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty (106), Y-V plasty (28), Fenger plasty (11) and others (two) were used, according to the intraoperative findings. Twenty-five patients had secondary obstruction, having had previous surgery to the PUJ. The mean (range) follow-up was 24 (3-84) months; all patients were followed clinically and radiologically. RESULTS The mean operative duration time was 246 (100-480) min and estimated blood loss was 158 mL. Crossing vessels were identified in 80 cases. The success rate for all, primary and secondary patients was 95%, 98% and 84%, respectively. With one exception, all failures occurred within 6 months. Twenty-one patients (22 renal units) had simultaneous laparoscopic pyeloplasty and lithotomy; they were treated successfully and all have an intact PUJ, and 20 renal units (90%) were stone-free. The overall complication rate was 8.8%. CONCLUSIONS This series has comparable success rates to those of open pyeloplasty and the morbidity was minimal. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty may soon become the standard operation for PUJ obstruction, especially with crossing vessels.
引用
收藏
页码:102 / 105
页数:4
相关论文
共 28 条
  • [1] ALBANI J, 2003, J UROL S4, V169, pA96
  • [2] Is open pyeloplasty still justified?
    Arun, N
    Kekre, NS
    Nath, V
    Gopalakrishnan, G
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1997, 80 (03): : 379 - 381
  • [3] Single-center comparison of laparoscopic pyeloplasty, Acucise endopyelotomy, and open pyeloplasty
    Baldwin, DD
    Dunbar, JA
    Wells, N
    McDougall, EM
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2003, 17 (03) : 155 - 160
  • [4] COMPARISON OF OPEN AND ENDOUROLOGICAL APPROACHES TO THE OBSTRUCTED URETEROPELVIC JUNCTION
    BROOKS, JD
    KAVOUSSI, LR
    PREMINGER, GM
    SCHUESSLER, WW
    MOORE, RG
    [J]. UROLOGY, 1995, 46 (06) : 791 - 795
  • [5] Percutaneous endopyeloplasty: A novel technique
    Desai, MM
    Gill, IS
    Carvalhal, EF
    Kaouk, JH
    Banks, K
    Raju, R
    Raja, SS
    Meraney, AM
    Sung, GT
    Sauer, J
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2002, 16 (07) : 431 - 443
  • [6] Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty: 50 consecutive cases
    Eden, CG
    Cahill, D
    Allen, JD
    [J]. BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2001, 88 (06) : 526 - 531
  • [7] Ureteroscopic endopyelotomy in the treatment of patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction
    Gerber, GS
    Kim, JC
    [J]. UROLOGY, 2000, 55 (02) : 198 - 202
  • [8] A comparison of laparoscopic pyeloplasty performed with the daVinci robotic system versus standard laparoscopic techniques: Initial clinical results
    Gettman, MT
    Peschel, R
    Neururer, R
    Bartsch, G
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2002, 42 (05) : 453 - 457
  • [9] Cost-effective treatment for ureteropelvic junction obstruction: A decision tree analysis
    Gettman, MT
    Lotan, Y
    Roerhborn, CG
    Cadeddu, JA
    Pearle, MS
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2003, 169 (01) : 228 - 232
  • [10] Percutaneous endopyeloplasty: Description of a new technique
    Gill, IS
    Desai, MM
    Kaouk, JH
    Wani, K
    Desai, MR
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2002, 168 (05) : 2097 - 2102