Measuring the true success of laparoscopic pyeloplasty

Journal of Endourology

Volumn 22, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 1193-1198

  Maynes, Lincoln J ^a   Levin, Brian M ^a   Webster, Todd M ^a   Baldwin, Duane ^a   Herrell, S Duke ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BLEEDING; COHORT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LENGTH OF STAY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OPERATION DURATION; PERIOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PEROPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PYELOPLASTY; RENOGRAPHY; SYMPTOM; TREATMENT FAILURE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; URETEROPELVIC JUNCTION OBSTRUCTION; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE;

ADOLESCENT; AGED; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; LAPAROSCOPY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGICAL PROCEDURES; URETERAL OBSTRUCTION;

EID: 46249086692     PISSN: 08927790     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/end.2008.0163     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Whitaker RH. Clinical assessment of pelvic and ureteral function. Urology 1978;12:146-150.
2. Persky L, Krause JR, Boltuch RL. Initial complications and late results in dismembered pyeloplasty. J Urol 1977;118: 162-165.
3. Foley FE. A new plastic operation for stricture at the uretero-pelvic junction: Report of 20 operations. 1937 J Urol 2002; 167:1075-1096.
4. Scardino PL, Prince CL. Vertical flap ureteropelvioplasty. South Med J 1953;46:325-331.
5. O'Reilly PH, Brooman PJ, Mak S, Jones M, Pickup C, Atkinson C, Pollard AJ. The long-term results of Anderson-Hynes pyeloplasty. BJU Int 2001;87:287-289.
6. Gögüs C, Karamürsel T, Tokatli Z, Yaman O, Ozdiler E, Gögüs O. Long-term results of Anderson-Hynes pyeloplasty in 180 adults in the era of endourologic procedures. Urol Int 2004;73:11-14.
7. Smith AD. Should open pyeloplasty be abandoned? J Urol 1997;157:467-468.
8. Bauer JJ, Bishoff JT, Moore RG, Chen RN, Iverson AJ, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty: Assessment of objective and subjective outcome. J Urol 1999;162:692-695.
9. Inagaki T, Rha KH, Ong AM, Kavoussi LR, Jarrett TW. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: current status. BJU Int 2005;95 (suppl 2):102-105.
10. Siqueira TM Jr, Nadu A, Kuo RL, Paterson RF, Lingeman JE, Shalhav AL. Laparoscopic treatment for ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Urology 2002;60:973-978.
11. Moore RG, Averch TD, Schulam PG, Adams JB II, Chen RN, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: Experience with the initial 30 cases. J Urol 1997;157:459-462.
12. Chen RN, Moore RG, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Indications, technique, and long-term outcome. Urol Clin North Am 1998;25:323-330.
13. Soulié M, Thoulouzan M, Seguin P, Mouly P, Vazzoler N, Pontonnier F, Plante P. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty with a minimal incision: Comparison of two surgical approaches. Urology 2001;57:443-447.
14. Eden C, Gianduzzo T, Chang C, Thiruchelvam N, Jones A. Extraperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty for primary and secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J Urol 2004;172:2308-2311.
15. Moon DA, El-Shazly MA, Chang CM, Gianduzzo TR, Eden CG. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: Evolution of a new gold standard. Urology 2006; 67:932-936.
16. Ben Slama MR, Salomon L, Hoznek A, et al. Extraperitoneal laparoscopic repair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction: Initial experience in 15 cases. Urology 2000;56:45-48.
17. Jarrett TW, Chan DY, Charambura TC, Fugita O, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: The first 100 cases. J Urol 2002;167:1253-1256.
18. Ost MC, Kaye JD, Guttman MJ, Lee BR, Smith AD. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty versus antegrade endopyelotomy: Comparison in 100 patients and a new algorithm for the minimally invasive treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Urology 2005; 66(suppl 5):47-51.
19. Chenven ES, McGinnis D, Strup SE. The 3-port laparoscopic pyeloplasty. J Urol 2004;171:1050-1053.
20. Webster TM, Baumgartner R, Sprunger JK, Baldwin DD, McDougall EM, Herrell SD. A clinical pathway for laparoscopic pyeloplasty decreases length of stay. J Urol 2005;173:2081-2084.
21. Albani JM, Yost AJ, Streem SB. Ureteropelvic junction obstruction: Determining durability of endourological intervention. J Urol 2004;171:579-582.
22. Lopez-Pujals A, Leveillee RJ, Wong C. Application of strict radiologic criteria to define success in laparoscopic pyeloplasty. J Endourol 2004;18:756-760.
23. Sundaram CP, Grubb RL III, Rehman J, Yan Y, Chen C, Landman J, McDougall EM, Clayman RV. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty for secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J Urol 2003;169:2037-40.
24. Levin BM, Herrell SD. Salvage laparoscopic pyeloplasty in the worst case scenario: After both failed open repair and endoscopic salvage. J Endourol 2006;20:808-812.
25. Türk 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.
26. Janetschek G, Peschel R, Bartsch G. Laparoscopic Fenger plasty. J Endourol 2000;14:889-893.
27. Rehman J, Landman J, Sundaram C, Clayman RV. Missed anterior crossing vessels during open retroperitoneal pyeloplasty: Laparoscopic transperitoneal discovery and repair. J Urol 2001;166:593-596.