Laparoscopy in pediatric urology

Current Urology Reports

Volumn 2, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 132-137

  Telsey, Jonathan I ^a   Caldamone, Anthony A ^a  

^a BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Antegrade Continence Enema; Pediatric Urology; Ureteral Reimplantation; Varicocele; Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; AGE; CHILD; HUMAN; INFANT; LAPAROSCOPY; METHODOLOGY; NEWBORN; PRESCHOOL CHILD; REVIEW; URINARY TRACT DISEASE; UROLOGIC SURGERY;

ADOLESCENT; AGE FACTORS; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; HUMANS; INFANT; INFANT, NEWBORN; LAPAROSCOPY; UROLOGIC DISEASES; UROLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES;

EID: 0035312276     PISSN: 15272737     EISSN: 15346285     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11934-001-0010-3     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Peters CA: Complications in pediatric urological laparoscopy: results of a survey. J Urol 1996, 155:1070–1073. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)66394-8
2. Poppas DP, Bleustein CB, Peters CA: Box stitch modification of Hasson technique for pediatric laparoscopy. J Endourol 1999, 13:447–450. DOI: 10.1089/end.1999.13.447
3. Yokomori K, Terawaki K, Kamii Y, et al.: A new technique applicable to pediatric laparoscopic surgery: abdominal wall ‘area lifting’ with subcutaneous wiring. J Pediatr Surg 1998, 33:1589–1592. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3468(98)90586-3
4. Malone PS, Ransley PG, Kiely EM: Preliminary report: the antegrade continence enema. Lancet 1990, 336:1217–1218. DOI: 10.1016/0140-6736(90)92834-5
5. Brown SF: Congenital malformations associated with myelomeningocele. J Iowa Med Soc 1975, 65:101.
6. Hedican SP, Schulam PG, Docimo SG: Laparoscopic assisted reconstructive surgery. J Urol 1999, 161:267–270. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)62129-3
7. Van Savage JG, Slaughenhoupt BL: Laparoscopic-assisted continent urinary diversion in obese patients. J Endourol 1999, 13:571–573.
8. Cadeddu JA, Docimo SG: Laparoscopic-assisted continent stoma procedures: our new standard. Urology 1999, 54:909–912. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(99)00333-7
9. Lynch AC, Beasley SW, Robertson RW, Morreau PN: Comparison of results of laparoscopic and open antegrade continence enema procedures. Pediatr Surg Int 1999, 15:343–346. DOI: 10.1007/s003830050595
10. Van Savage JG, Yohannes P: Laparoscopic antegrade continence enema in situ appendix procedure for refractory constipation and overflow fecal incontinence in children with spina bifida. J Urol 2000, 164:1084–1087. DOI: 10.1097/00005392-200009020-00041
11. Uzzo RG, Bilsky M, Mininberg DT, Poppas DP: Laparoscopic surgery in children with ventriculoperitoneal shunts: effect of pneumoperitoneum on intracranial pressure—prelimi-nary experience. Urology 1997, 49:753–757. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00233-1
12. Jackman SV, Weingart JD, Kinsman SL, Docimo SG: Laparo-scopic surgery in patients with ventriculoperitoneal shunts: safety and monitoring. J Urol 2000, 164:1352–1354. The authors reviewed patients with VP shunts undergoing pneumo-peritoneum and found that there were no outward manifestations that would have drawn attention to the possibility of a clinically significant increase in ICP. As a result, the authors believe that intra-operative ICP monitoring in patients with VP shunts is not necessary. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67196-0
13. Duckett JW: Pediatric laparoscopy: prudence, please. J Urol 1994, 151:742.
14. Moore RG, Peters CA, Bauer SB, et al.: Laparoscopic evaluation of the nonpalpable testis: a prospective assessment of accuracy. J Urol 1994, 151:728.
15. Tennenbaum SY, Lerner SE, McAleer IM, et al.: Preoperative laparoscopic localization of the nonpalpable testis: a critical analysis of a 10-year experience. J Urol 1994, 151:732.
16. Ferro F, Spagnoli A, Zaccara A, et al.: Is preoperative laparo-scopy useful for impalpable testis? J Urol 1999, 162:995–996. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)68044-3
17. Cisek LJ, Peters CA, Atala A, et al.: Current findings in diagnostic laparoscopic evaluation of the nonpalpable testis. J Urol 1998, 160:1145–1149. A critical review concluding that preoperative laparoscopy is a valuable tool in the evaluation and treatment of NPT. The authors found that laparoscopy prevented unnecessary abdominal explora-tion 13.2% of the time and could help plan the operative approach to orchiopexy. In 66% of cases, an inguinal incision would not have been the ideal approach based on the location of the testis at laparo-scopy. It was noted that the appearance of the vessels and vas deferens as they entered the internal ring determined the probability of locating a viable testis. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)62721-6
18. Hay SA, Soliman HA, Abdel Rahman AH, Bassiouny IE: Laparoscopic classification and treatment of the impalpable testis. Pediatr Surg Int 1999, 15:570–572. DOI: 10.1007/s003830050674
19. Lindgren BW, Darby EC, Faiella L, et al.: Laparoscopic orchio-pexy: procedure of choice for the nonpalpable testis? J Urol 1998, 159:2132. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)63294-4
20. Lindgren BW, Franco I, Blick S, et al.: Laparoscopic Fowler-Stephens orchiopexy for the high abdominal testis. J Urol 1999, 162:990–993. This study demonstrated that the outcomes for the one-stage and two-stage Fowler-Stephens approaches were statistically comparable. The authors favored a one-stage laparoscopic orchiopexy as it precluded a second procedure along with the inherent risk of undergoing anesthe-sia for a second time. It also eliminated the possibility of scarring after the first stage and the inherent difficulty of mobilizing the testicle at the second stage. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)68042-X
21. Ferrer FA, Cadeddu JA, Schulam P, et al.: Orchiopexy using 2 mm laparoscopic instruments: 2 techniques for delivering the testis into the scrotum. J Urol 2000, 164:160–161. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67486-1
22. Hamilton BD, Gatti JM, Cartwright PC, Snow BW: Comparison of laparoscopic versus open nephrectomy in the pediatric population. J Urol 2000, 163:937–939. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67856-1
23. Yao D, Poppas DP: A clinical series of laparoscopic nephrec-tomy, nephroureterectomy and heminephroureterectomy in the pediatric population. J Urol 2000, 163:1531–1535. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67672-0
24. El-Ghoneimi A, Valla JS, Steyaert H, Aigrain Y: Laparoscopic renal surgery via a retroperitoneal approach in children. J Urol 1998, 160:1138–1141. Review of laparoscopic renal surgery for a variety of procedures via the retroperitoneal approach including laparoscopic nephrectomy, hemi-nephrectomy, renal cyst excision, and pyelolithotomy. While the outcomes were very favorable, a peritoneal laceration resulting in pneumoperitoneum occurred in 30% of cases. This was managed by either suturing the defect or by decompressing the abdomen with the placement of a Veress needle. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)62719-8
25. El-Ghoneimi A, Sauty L, Maintenant J, et al.: Laparoscopic retroperitoneal nephrectomy in high risk children. J Urol 2000, 164:1076–1079. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67255-2
26. Yeung CK, Liu KW, Ng WT, et al.: Laparoscopy as the investiga-tion and treatment of choice for urinary incontinence caused by small ‘invisible’ dysplastic kidneys with infrasphincteric ureteric ectopia. BJU Int 1999, 84:324–328. DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.00162.x
27. Caione P, Micali S, Rinaldi S, et al.: Retroperitoneal laparo-scopy for renal biopsy in children. J Urol 2000, 164:1080–1082. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67256-4
28. Bauer JJ, Bishoff JT, Moore RG, et al.: Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty: assessment of objective and subjective outcome. J Urol 1999, 162:692–695. A study comparing laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty to open dismembered pyeloplasty. The authors found that there were no significant differences between the two procedures with respect to resolution of the obstruction, pain relief, and activity level postopera-tively. The study included older children and adults only. DOI: 10.1097/00005392-199909010-00016
29. Tan HL: Laparoscopic Anderson-Hynes dismembered pyelo-plasty in children. J Urol 1999, 162:1045–1047. The authors reviewed laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty in children. The procedure was discouraged in children less than 6 months of age as two cases of ureteral stenosis were attributed to the technical difficulty of the operation due to the young age of the patient and the small caliber of the ureter. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)68060-1
30. Lakshmanan Y, Fung LCT: Laparoscopic extravesical ureteral reimplantation for vesicoureteral reflux: recent technical advances. J Endourol 2000, 14:589. The authors described their technique for performing laparoscopic extravesical ureteral reimplantation including the use of small ports, atraumatic manipulation of the ureter, and the use of an inverted Y myotomy to create the bladder tunnel. DOI: 10.1089/08927790050152203
31. Esposito C, Monguzzi GL, Gonzalez-Sabin MA, et al.: Laparo-scopic treatment of pediatric varicocele: a multicenter study of the Italian society of video surgery in infancy. J Urol 2000, 163:1944–1946. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67604-5
32. Minevich E, Wacksman J, Lewis AG, Sheldon CA: Inguinal microsurgical varicocelectomy in the adolescent: technique and preliminary results. J Urol 1998, 159:1022–1024. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)63827-8
33. Lemack GE, Uzzo RG, Schlegal PN, Goldstein M: Microsurgical repair of the adolescent varicocele. J Urol 1998, 160:179–181. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)63086-6
34. Yerkes EB, Brock JW, Holcomb GW, Morgan WM: Laparoscopic evaluation for a contralateral patent processus vaginalis: part III. Urology 1998, 51:480–483. DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00719-X
35. Geiger JD: Selective laparoscopic probing for a contralateral patent processus vaginalis reduces the need for contralateral exploration in inconclusive cases. J Pediatr Surg 2000, 35:1151–1154. DOI: 10.1053/jpsu.2000.8714
36. Esposito C, Montupet P: Laparoscopic treatment of recurrent inguinal hernia in children. Pediatr Surg Int 1998, 14:182–184.
37. Schier F: Laparoscopic surgery of inguinal hernias in children—initial experience. J Pediatr Surg 2000, 35:1331–1335. DOI: 10.1053/jpsu.2000.9326