Anderson-Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty performed using the da Vinci robotic system

Urology

Volumn 60, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 509-513

  Gettman, Matthew T ^a   Neururer, Richard ^a   Bartsch, Georg ^a   Peschel, Reinhard ^a  

^a INNSBRUCK MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BLEEDING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVALUATION; EXPERIENCE; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; KIDNEY INJURY; KIDNEY PELVIS; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LENGTH OF STAY; OPERATION DURATION; PERIOPERATIVE PERIOD; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PYELOPLASTY; ROBOTICS; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; SUTURE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 0036754182     PISSN: 00904295     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(02)01761-2     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Kavoussi L.R., Peters C.A. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty. J Urol. 150:1993;1891-1984.
2. Schuessler W.W., Grune M.T., Tecuanhuey L.V., et al. Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty. J Urol. 150:1993;1795-1799.
3. Ben Slama M.R., Salomon L., Hoznek A., et al. Extraperitoneal laparoscopic repair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction initial experience in 15 cases . Urology. 56:2000;45-48.
4. Janetschek G., Reschel R., Frauscher F. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Urol Clin North Am. 27:2000;695-704.
5. Soulie M., Thoulouzan M., Seguin P., et al. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty with a minimal incision comparison of two surgical approaches . Urology. 57:2001;443-447.
6. Eden C.G., Cahill D., Allen J.D. Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty 50 consecutive cases . BJU Int. 88:2001;526-531.
7. Moore R.G., Averch T.D., Schulam P.G., et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty experience with the initial 30 cases . J Urol. 157:1997;459-462.
8. Chen R.N., Moore R.G., Kavoussi L.R. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty indications, technique, and long-term followup . Urol Clin North Am. 25:1998;323-330.
9. Bauer J.J., Bishoff J.T., Moore R.G., et al. Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty assessment of objective and subjective outcome . J Urol. 162:1999;692-695.
10. Brooks J.D., Kavoussi L.R., Preminger G.M., et al. Comparison of open and endourologic approaches to the obstructed ureteropelvic junction. Urology. 46:1995;791-795.
11. Soulie M., Thoulouzan M., Seguin P., et al. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty with a minimal incision comparison of two surgical approaches . Urology. 57:2001;443-447.
12. Peschel R., Neururer R., Scheidel A.P., et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty for management of ureteropelvic junction obstruction long-term results . Eur Urol. 1:(suppl):2002;58.
13. Jarrett T.W., Chan D.Y., Charambura T.C., et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty the first 100 cases . J Urol. 167:2002;1253-1256.
14. Gettman M., Peschel R., Neururer R., et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty comparison of procedures performed with the da Vinci robotic system versus standard techniques . Eur Urol. 1:(suppl):2002;58.
15. Rassweiler J., Frede T., Seemann O., et al. Telesurgical laparoscopic radical prostatectomy initial experience . Eur Urol. 40:2001;75-83.
16. Sung G.T., Gill I.S., Hsu T.H. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty a pilot study . Urology. 53:1999;1099-1103.
17. Pasticier G., Rietbergen J.B.W., Guillonneau B., et al. Robotically assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy feasibility study in men . Eur Urol. 40:2001;70-74.
18. Binder J., Kramer W. Robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 87:2001;408-410.
19. Abbou C.C., Hoznek A., Salomon L., et al. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with a remote controlled robot. J Urol. 165:2001;1964-1966.