Robotic laparoscopic pyeloplasty
- PMID: 24680152
- PMCID: PMC3939324
- DOI: 10.4293/108680813X1369342251983
Robotic laparoscopic pyeloplasty
Abstract
Background and objectives: We aimed to assess the feasibility and outcomes of complex ureteropelvic junction obstruction cases submitted to robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty.
Methods: The records of 131 consecutive patients who underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty were reviewed. Of this initial population of cases, 17 were considered complex, consisting of either atypical anatomy (horseshoe kidneys in 3 patients) or previous ureteropelvic junction obstruction management (14 patients). The patients were divided into 2 groups: primary pyeloplasty (group 1) and complex cases (group 2).
Results: The mean operative time was 117.3 ± 33.5 minutes in group 1 and 153.5 ± 31.1 minutes in group 2 (P = .002). The median hospital stay was 5.19 ± 1.66 days in group 1 and 5.90 ± 2.33 days in group 2 (P = .326). The surgical findings included 53 crossing vessels in group 1 and 5 in group 2. One patient in group 1 required conversion to open surgery because of technical difficulties. One patient in group 2, with a history of hemorrhagic rectocolitis, presented with peritonitis postoperatively due to a small colonic injury. A secondary procedure was performed after the patient had an uneventful recovery. At 3 months, significant improvement (clinical and radiologic) was present in 93% of cases in group 1 and 88.2% in group 2. At 1 year, all patients in group 2 showed satisfactory results. At a late follow-up visit, 1 patient in group 1 presented with a recurrent obstruction.
Conclusions: Robotic pyeloplasty appear to be feasible and effective, showing a consistent success rate even in complex situations. Particular care should be observed during the colon dissection in patients with previous colonic pathology.
References
-
- Arun N, Kekre NS, Nath V, Gopalakrishnan G. Is open pyeloplasty still justified? Br J Urol. 1997;80:379–381 - PubMed
-
- O'Reilly PH, Brooman PJ, Mak S, et al. The long-term results of Anderson-Hynes pyeloplasty. BJU Int. 2001;87:287–289 - PubMed
-
- Brooks JD, Kavoussi LR, Preminger GM, et al. Comparison of open and endourologic approaches to the obstructed ureteropelvic junction. Urology. 1995;46:791–795 - PubMed
-
- Canes D, Berger A, Gettman MT, Desai MM. Minimally invasive approaches to ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Urol Clin North Am. 2008;35:425–439, viii - PubMed
-
- Moon DA, El-Shazly MA, Chang CM, et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: evolution of a new gold standard. Urology. 2006;67:932–936 - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical