Is antegrade endopyelotomy really less invasive than open pyeloplasty?

Urologia Internationalis

Volumn 79, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 152-156

  Dobry, E ^a,b   Usai, P ^a   Studer, U E ^a   Danuser, H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

^b Urologic Clinic   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Antegrade endopyelotomy, invasiveness; Pyeloplasty, open; Ureteropelvic junction obstruction

Indexed keywords

DIPYRONE; MORPHINE; NONSTEROID ANTIINFLAMMATORY AGENT; OPIATE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE SEVERITY; ENDOPYELOTOMY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTRAVENOUS UROGRAPHY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MORBIDITY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE PAIN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PYELOGRAPHY; PYELOPLASTY; PYELOTOMY; RENOGRAPHY; RETROGRADE PYELOGRAPHY; SURGICAL RISK; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; URETEROPELVIC JUNCTION OBSTRUCTION;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ENDOSCOPY; FEMALE; HUMANS; KIDNEY PELVIS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; URETERAL OBSTRUCTION; UROLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES;

EID: 34548645845     PISSN: 00421138     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000106330     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Scardino PT, Scardino PL: Obstruction at the ureteropelvic junction; in Bergman H (ed): The Ureter, ed 2. New York, Springer, 1981, pp 697-716.
2. Gupta M, Tuncay OL, Smith AD: Open surgical exploration after failed endopyelotomy: a 12-year perspective. J Urol 1997;157:1613-1619.
3. Danuser H, Ackermann DK, Bohlen D, et al: Endopyelotomy for primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction: risk factors determine the success rate. J Urol 1998;159:56-61.
4. Khan AM, Holman E, Pasztor I, et al: Endopyelotomy: experience with 320 cases. J Endourol 1997;11:243-246.
5. Van Cangh PJ, Wilmart JF, Opsomer RJ, et al: Long-term results and late recurrence after endoureteropyelotomy: a critical analysis of prognostic factors. J Urol 1994;151:934-937.
6. Kletscher BA, Segura JW, LeRoy AJ, et al: Percutaneous antegrade endopyelotomy: review of 50 consecutive cases. J Urol 1995;153:701-703.
7. Cuzin B, Abbar M, Dawahra M, et al: 100 endopyélotomies percutanées. Technique, indication, résultats. Prog Urol 1992;2:559-569.
8. Chandhoke PS, Clayman RV, Stone AM, et al: Endopyelotomy and endoureterotomy with the acucise ureteral cutting balloon device: preliminary experience. J Endourol 1993;7:45-51.
9. Nadler RB, Rao GS, Pearle MS, et al: Acucise endopyelotomy: assessment of long-term durability. J Urol 1996;156:1094-1098.
10. Gelet A, Combe M, Ramackers JM, et al: Endopyelotomy with the Acucise cutting balloon device. Early clinical experience. Eur Urol 1997;31:389-393.
11. Shalhav AL, Giusti G, Elbahnasy AM, et al: Adult endopyelotomy: impact of etiology and antegrade versus retrograde approach on outcome. J Urol 1998;160:685-689.
12. Kim FJ, Herrell SD, Jahoda AE, et al: Complications of acucise endopyelotomy. J Endourol 1998;12:433-436.
13. Lechevallier E, Eghazarian C, Ortega JC, et al: Retrograde Acucise endopyelotomy: longterm results. J Endourol 1999;13:575-580.
14. Jarrett TW, Chan DY, Charambura TC, et al: Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: the first 100 cases. J Urol 2002;167:1253-1256.
15. Janetschek G, Peschel R, Frauscher F, et al: Laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Urol Clin North Am 2000;27:695-704.
16. Sundaram CP, Grubb RL 3rd, Rehman J, et al: Laparoscopic pyeloplasty for secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J Urol 2003;169:2037-2040.
17. Soulie M, Salomon L, Patard JJ, et al: Extraperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty: a multicenter study of 55 procedures. J Urol 2001;166:48-50.
18. Turk IA, Davis JW, Winkelmann B, et al: Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty - the method of choice in the presence of an enlarged renal pelvis and crossing vessels. Eur Urol 2002;42:268-275.
19. Eden CG, Cahill D, Allen JD: Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty: 50 consecutive cases. BJU Int 2001;88:526-531.
20. Peschel R, Neururer R, Bartsch G, et al: Robotic pyeloplasty: technique and results. Urol Clin North Am 2004;31:737-741.
21. Karlin GS, Badlani GH, Smith AD: Endopyelotomy versus open pyeloplasty: comparison in 88 patients. J Urol 1988;140:476-478.
22. Brooks JD, Kavoussi LR, Preminger GM, et al: Comparison of open and endourologic approaches to the obstructed ureteropelvic junction. Urology 1995;46:791-795.
23. Bayazit Y, Aridogan IA, Tansug Z, et al: Morbidity of flank incision in 100 renal donors. Int Urol Nephrol 2001;32:709-711.
24. Aubert J, Koumare K, Dufrenot A: Anatomical study of the twelfth intercostal nerve and oblique lumbotomies (in French). J Urol (Paris) 1981;87:283-289.