One-Port Retroperitoneoscopic Assisted Pyeloplasty Versus Open Dismembered Pyeloplasty in Young Children: Preliminary Experience

被引:17
|
作者
Caione, Paolo [1 ]
Lais, Alberto
Nappo, Simona Gerocarni
机构
[1] Bambino Gesu Pediat Hosp, Dept Nephrol Urol, Div Pediat Urol, I-00165 Rome, Italy
关键词
hydronephrosis; kidney pelvis; laparoscopy; surgical procedures; minimally invasive; LAPAROSCOPIC PYELOPLASTY; AGE;
D O I
10.1016/j.juro.2010.06.126
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
Purpose: We propose 1-port retroperitoneoscopic assisted pyeloplasty as a minimally invasive approach and compare the results to open dismembered pyeloplasty. Materials and Methods: All patients 6 months to 5 years old presenting with ureteropelvic junction obstruction between January 2008 and June 2009 were offered 1-port retroperitoneoscopic assisted pyeloplasty. Age matched patients who underwent open dismembered pyeloplasty during 2007 served as controls. The ureteropelvic junction was isolated retroperitoneoscopically and exteriorized through a single operative trocar. Pyeloplasty was performed in an open fashion with Double-J (R) stenting. Operative time, postoperative pain, surgical complications, hospital stay, ultrasound and mercaptoacetyltriglycine nuclear scan results at 6-month followup were evaluated and compared. Chi-square test and Student's t test were adopted for statistical analysis, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 28 children (17 males) with a mean age of 18 months were treated with 1-port retroperitoneoscopic assisted pyeloplasty (18 left side). The control group consisted of 25 patients (11 males) with a mean age of 19 months who underwent open dismembered pyeloplasty (10 left side). Median operative time was 95 minutes (range 70 to 130) in 1-port retroperitoneoscopic assisted pyeloplasty and 72 minutes (58 to 102) in open dismembered pyeloplasty (p < 0.05). Median postoperative hospital stay was 2.4 days with the 1-port approach and 6.1 days with the open procedure (p < 0.05). Postoperative pain was significantly less in the 1-port group. Skin scar length was 1.4 to 2.9 cm (median 1.7) with 1-port retroperitoneoscopic assisted pyeloplasty and 3.5 to 6.0 cm (4.3) in the open group (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The 1-port retroperitoneoscopic assisted pyeloplasty represents a safe and effective minimally invasive technique to treat hydronephrosis and could be the treatment of choice in young children. The procedure does not require laparoscopic suturing skills, and combines the advantages of open and laparoscopic pyeloplasty.
引用
收藏
页码:2109 / 2115
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Minilaparoscopic Versus Open Pyeloplasty in Children Less Than 1 Year
    Masieri, Lorenzo
    Sforza, Simone
    Cini, Chiara
    Escolino, Maria
    Grosso, Antonio
    Esposito, Ciro
    Minervini, Andrea
    Carini, Marco
    JOURNAL OF LAPAROENDOSCOPIC & ADVANCED SURGICAL TECHNIQUES, 2019, 29 (07): : 970 - 975
  • [32] Laparoscopy versus robotic-assisted pyeloplasty in children: preliminary results of a pilot prospective randomized controlled trial
    Mesrur Selcuk Silay
    Onur Danacioglu
    Kerem Ozel
    M. Ihsan Karaman
    Turhan Caskurlu
    World Journal of Urology, 2020, 38 : 1841 - 1848
  • [33] Laparoscopy versus robotic-assisted pyeloplasty in children: preliminary results of a pilot prospective randomized controlled trial
    Silay, Mesrur Selcuk
    Danacioglu, Onur
    Ozel, Kerem
    Karaman, M. Ihsan
    Caskurlu, Turhan
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2020, 38 (08) : 1841 - 1848
  • [34] Minimally invasive open dismembered pyeloplasty technique: Miniature incision, muscle-splitting dissection, and nopelvis reduction in children
    Sharifiaghdas, Farzaneh
    Mirzaei, Mahboubeh
    Daneshpajooh, Azar
    Abbaszadeh, Shahin
    ASIAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 6 (03) : 290 - 293
  • [35] Endopyelotomy versus redo pyeoloplasty for management of failed pyeloplasty in children: A single center experience
    Abdrabuh, Abdrabuh M.
    Salih, Elsayed M.
    Aboelnasr, Mahmoud
    Galal, Hussein
    El-Emam, Abdelbasset
    El-Zayat, Tarek
    JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC SURGERY, 2018, 53 (11) : 2250 - 2255
  • [36] Laparoscopic Versus Robot-Assisted Pyeloplasty in Adults-A Single-Center Experience
    Carmona, Orel
    Dotan, Zohar A.
    Haifler, Miki
    Rosenzweig, Barak
    Zilberman, Dorit E.
    JOURNAL OF PERSONALIZED MEDICINE, 2022, 12 (10):
  • [37] An updated meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children
    Huang, Yidong
    Wu, Yang
    Shan, Wei
    Zeng, Li
    Huang, Lugang
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE, 2015, 8 (04): : 4922 - 4931
  • [38] The missed crossing vessel during open pyeloplasty: a potential advantage of the robot-assisted approach in children
    Abdulfattah, Suhaib
    Zirel, Laura
    Mittal, Sameer
    Srinivasan, Arun
    Shukla, Aseem R.
    JOURNAL OF ROBOTIC SURGERY, 2024, 18 (01)
  • [39] Preliminary Experience With External Ureteropelvic Stent: Alternative to Double-J Stent in Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty in Children
    Helmy, Tamer
    Blanc, Thomas
    Paye-Jaouen, Annabel
    El-Ghoneimi, Alaa
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2011, 185 (03) : 1065 - 1069
  • [40] Low anterolateral incision for single-port extraperitoneal robot-assisted pyeloplasty: description of technique and initial experience
    Ramos, Roxana
    Chavali, Jaya S.
    Ferguson, Ethan
    Soputro, Nicolas
    Geskin, Albert
    Rhee, Audrey
    Kaouk, Jihad
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2024, 42 (01)