Global minimally invasive pyeloplasty study in children: Results from the Pediatric Urology Expert Group of the European Association of Urology Young Academic Urologists working party
- PMID: 27346071
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2016.04.007
Global minimally invasive pyeloplasty study in children: Results from the Pediatric Urology Expert Group of the European Association of Urology Young Academic Urologists working party
Abstract
Introduction: Minimally invasive pyeloplasty (MIP) for ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction in children has gained popularity over the past decade as an alternative to open surgery. The present study aimed to identify the factors affecting complication rates of MIP in children, and to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic (LP) and robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP).
Materials and methods: The perioperative data of 783 pediatric patients (<18 years old) from 15 academic centers who underwent either LP or RALP with an Anderson Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty technique were retrospectively evaluated. Redo cases and patients with anatomic renal abnormalities were excluded. Demographics and operative data, including procedural factors, were collected. Complications were classified according to the Satava and modified Clavien systems. Failure was defined as any of the following: obstructive parameters on diuretic renal scintigraphy, decline in renal function, progressive hydronephrosis, or symptom relapse. Univariate and multivariate analysis were applied to identify factors affecting the complication rates. All parameters were compared between LP and RALP.
Results: A total of 575 children met the inclusion criteria. Laparoscopy, increased operative time, prolonged hospital stay, ureteral stenting technique, and time required for stenting were factors influencing complication rates on univariate analysis. None of those factors remained significant on multivariate analysis. Mean follow-up was 12.8 ± 9.8 months for RALP and 45.2 ± 33.8 months for LP (P = 0.001). Hospital stay and time for stenting were shorter for robotic pyeloplasty (P < 0.05 for both). Success rates were similar between RALP and LP (99.5% vs 97.3%, P = 0.11). The intraoperative complication rate was comparable between RALP and LP (3.8% vs 7.4%, P = 0.06). However, the postoperative complication rate was significantly higher in the LP group (3.2% for RALP and 7.7% for LP, P = 0.02). All complications were of no greater severity than Satava Grade IIa and Clavien Grade IIIb.
Discussion: This was the largest multicenter series of LP and RALP in the pediatric population. Limitations of the study included the retrospective design and lack of surgical experience as a confounder.
Conclusions: Both minimally invasive approaches that were studied were safe and highly effective in treating UPJ obstruction in children in many centers globally. However, shorter hospitalization time and lower postoperative complication rates with RALP were noted. The aims of the study were met.
Keywords: Children; Laparoscopy; Pyeloplasty; Robot.
Copyright © 2016 Journal of Pediatric Urology Company. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Comment in
-
Response to Letter to the Editor re 'Global minimally invasive pyeloplasty study in children: Results from the pediatric urology expert group of the EAU young academic urologists working party'.J Pediatr Urol. 2018 Apr;14(2):206. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2017.11.015. Epub 2018 Feb 21. J Pediatr Urol. 2018. PMID: 29429826 No abstract available.
-
Re: Global minimally invasive pyeloplasty study in children: Results from the pediatric urology expert group of the European association of urology young academic urologists working party.J Pediatr Urol. 2018 Apr;14(2):205. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2017.11.017. Epub 2018 Jan 10. J Pediatr Urol. 2018. PMID: 29559275 No abstract available.
-
Response to Silay et al.J Pediatr Urol. 2018 Aug;14(4):360-361. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2018.04.024. Epub 2018 May 28. J Pediatr Urol. 2018. PMID: 29885871 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Robot-assisted vs laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children with uretero-pelvic junction obstruction (UPJO): technical considerations and results.J Pediatr Urol. 2019 Dec;15(6):667.e1-667.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2019.09.018. Epub 2019 Sep 30. J Pediatr Urol. 2019. PMID: 31734119
-
From Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty to Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty in Primary and Reoperative Repairs for Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction in Children.J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2018 Aug;28(8):1012-1018. doi: 10.1089/lap.2017.0561. Epub 2018 Mar 13. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2018. PMID: 29641368
-
Has robot-assisted pyeloplasty reached outcome parity with laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children <15 kg? A Paediatric YAU international multi-center study.J Pediatr Urol. 2024 Dec;20(6):1154-1159. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2024.09.008. Epub 2024 Sep 14. J Pediatr Urol. 2024. PMID: 39307658
-
A systematic review and metaanalysis of open, conventional laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic techniques for re-do pyeloplasty for recurrent uretero pelvic junction obstruction in children.J Pediatr Urol. 2022 Oct;18(5):642-649. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2022.08.025. Epub 2022 Sep 3. J Pediatr Urol. 2022. PMID: 36117037
-
Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in infants and children: is it superior to conventional laparoscopy?World J Urol. 2020 Aug;38(8):1827-1833. doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-02943-z. Epub 2019 Sep 10. World J Urol. 2020. PMID: 31506749 Review.
Cited by
-
Ureteropelvic junction obstruction in infants: Open or minimally invasive surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Front Pediatr. 2022 Nov 23;10:1052440. doi: 10.3389/fped.2022.1052440. eCollection 2022. Front Pediatr. 2022. PMID: 36507128 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Comparative study of robotic-assisted single-incision-plus-one port and single-incision laparoscopic choledochal cyst excision.Front Pediatr. 2024 Sep 19;12:1403358. doi: 10.3389/fped.2024.1403358. eCollection 2024. Front Pediatr. 2024. PMID: 39363967 Free PMC article.
-
Transperitoneal Mini-Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty in Flank Position: A Safe Method for Infants and Young Adults.Front Surg. 2018 Apr 19;5:32. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2018.00032. eCollection 2018. Front Surg. 2018. PMID: 29725594 Free PMC article.
-
Single-Site Laparoscopy and Robotic Surgery in Pediatric Urology.Curr Urol Rep. 2018 Apr 17;19(6):42. doi: 10.1007/s11934-018-0794-z. Curr Urol Rep. 2018. PMID: 29667065 Review.
-
Robotic-assisted pyeloplasty in children: a systematic review of the literature.J Robot Surg. 2023 Aug;17(4):1239-1246. doi: 10.1007/s11701-023-01559-1. Epub 2023 Mar 13. J Robot Surg. 2023. PMID: 36913057 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Miscellaneous