One-port retroperitoneoscopic assisted pyeloplasty versus open dismembered pyeloplasty in young children: preliminary experience
- PMID: 20851429
- DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.06.126
One-port retroperitoneoscopic assisted pyeloplasty versus open dismembered pyeloplasty in young children: preliminary experience
Abstract
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® 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.
Copyright © 2010 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Comment in
-
Editorial comment.J Urol. 2010 Nov;184(5):2115; discussion 2115. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.06.166. Epub 2010 Sep 18. J Urol. 2010. PMID: 20851432 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Which is better--retroperitoneoscopic or laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty in children?J Urol. 2007 Oct;178(4 Pt 2):1791-5; discussion 1795. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.03.200. Epub 2007 Aug 17. J Urol. 2007. PMID: 17707427
-
Retroperitoneoscopic vs open dismembered pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children.J Pediatr Urol. 2009 Oct;5(5):368-73. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2009.02.202. Epub 2009 Apr 14. J Pediatr Urol. 2009. PMID: 19369118
-
[Retroperitoneoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty in children].Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2006 Jul 15;44(14):960-2. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2006. PMID: 17074205 Chinese.
-
Minimally invasive surgical management of pelvic-ureteric junction obstruction: update on the current status of robotic-assisted pyeloplasty.BJU Int. 2009 Dec;104(11):1722-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08682.x. Epub 2009 Jun 10. BJU Int. 2009. PMID: 19519760 Review.
-
Comparative Outcomes of Laparoscopic, Retroperitoneoscopic, and One-Trocar-Assisted-Pyeloplasty in Pediatric Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction: A Scoping Review of Literature.J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2025 Aug;35(8):683-693. doi: 10.1089/lap.2025.0007. Epub 2025 May 26. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2025. PMID: 40420547
Cited by
-
Lumboscopic-Assisted Pyeloplasty: A Single-Port, Retroperitoneoscopic Approach for Children with Pelvi-Ureteric Junction Obstruction.J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg. 2020 May-Jun;25(3):163-168. doi: 10.4103/jiaps.JIAPS_5_19. Epub 2020 Apr 11. J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg. 2020. PMID: 32581444 Free PMC article.
-
One-trocar-assisted pyeloplasty: An attractive alternative to open pyeloplasty.Afr J Paediatr Surg. 2015 Oct-Dec;12(4):266-9. doi: 10.4103/0189-6725.172569. Afr J Paediatr Surg. 2015. PMID: 26712293 Free PMC article.
-
Long-term outcome of retroperitoneoscopic one-trocar-assisted pyeloplasty: a single-center and single-surgeon experience.Int Urol Nephrol. 2024 Nov;56(11):3469-3477. doi: 10.1007/s11255-024-04091-9. Epub 2024 May 27. Int Urol Nephrol. 2024. PMID: 38797767
-
Laparoscopic assisted dismembered pyeloplasty versus open pyeloplasty in UPJO with poorly function kidney in pediatrics.Int Urol Nephrol. 2024 Feb;56(2):381-388. doi: 10.1007/s11255-023-03799-4. Epub 2023 Sep 26. Int Urol Nephrol. 2024. PMID: 37751052 Free PMC article.
-
Comparative, Prospective, Case-Control Study of Open versus Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty in Children with Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction: Long-term Results.Front Pediatr. 2017 Feb 1;5:10. doi: 10.3389/fped.2017.00010. eCollection 2017. Front Pediatr. 2017. PMID: 28203561 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical