We have located links that may give you full text access.
Robotic laparoscopic pyeloplasty.
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.
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.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app