Is antegrade endopyelotomy really less invasive than open pyeloplasty?

Objective: We investigated the invasiveness of antegrade endopyelotomy and open pyeloplasty in two consecutive series of patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Patients and Methods: 98 patients were treated by open pyeloplasty from 1980 to 1991, and 137 patients by antegrade endopyelotomy from 1991 to 1999. Diagnosis of ureteropelvic junction obstruction was made by excretory urogram and/ or antegrade pyelography, diuretic renography and retrograde pyelography. Invasiveness was evaluated by the postoperative need for analgesics, the complication rate and the residual long- term symptoms after surgery. Results: The postoperative need for opiate analgesics was significantly higher in patients after open pyeloplasty than after antegrade endopyelotomy. Ten percent of the patients complained of problems with the lumbotomy scar after open pyeloplasty, which was not encountered after endopyelotomy. Complications after open pyeloplasty occurred in 24% and were more severe than the 11% seen after endopyelotomy. The primary success rate after open pyeloplasty was 98 and 89% after antegrade endopyelotomy. The long- term success rate, >= 24 month postoperatively, was 96% ( median followup 37 ( 24 - 196) months) and 76% ( median follow- up 32 ( 24 - 73) months), respectively. Conclusion: Open pyeloplasty and endopyelotomy both have a high success rate with better patency results after open pyeloplasty. Open pyeloplasty is more invasive and has a higher morbidity. Endopyelotomy is a minimally invasive procedure with faster recovery, fewer and minor complications, significantly less need for peri-and postoperative analgesics, less residual pain due to the access, and no functional and esthetic sequelae of lumbotomy.