OBJECTIVE:To analyze the outcomes of our robotic-assisted pyeloplasty series for primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) and compare them with our series of robotic-assisted pyeloplasty for secondary UPJO.
The repair of secondary UPJO can pose additional challenges to surgeons. Robotic assistance could aid in these repairs.
METHODS: Using an institutional review board-approved database, we reviewed 119 consecutive patients who had undergone robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty at our institution during an 8-year period (May 2002 to February 2010). Data were collected in a combined retrospective and prospective manner. The patients were stratified into primary repair and secondary repair for the primary analysis. The patients were also stratified into those with stones and those without stones for the secondary analysis. We compared the demographic, operative, postoperative, and radiographic outcomes. Student's t test and Pearson's chi-square correlation were used for statistical analysis of continuous and categorical variables, respectively.
RESULTS: Of the original 119 patients, data were available for 117. Of the 117 patients, 97 had undergone primary pyeloplasty repair and 20 had undergone secondary pyleloplasty repair. Radiographic data were available for 84 patients with primary repair and 17 patients with secondary repair. The radiographic success rate was 96.1% and 94.1%, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found in the patient demographics, operative data, or postoperative or radiographic outcomes for the primary analysis. Additionally, no differences were found in the outcomes for patients with concomitant stone disease.
CONCLUSION: These data represent the largest single-center report of its kind. These data strongly suggest that robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty is a safe and durable option for secondary UPJO repair.
Written by:
Niver BE, Agalliu I, Bareket R, Mufarrij P, Shah O, Stifelman MD. Are you the author?
Department of Urology, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
Reference: Urology. 2012 Mar;79(3):689-94.
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2011.10.072
PubMed Abstract
PMID: 22386423
UroToday.com Pediatric Urology Section