Robotic renal and upper tract reconstruction

Current Opinion in Urology

Volumn 18, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 557-563

  Hyams, Elias S ^a   Mufarrij, Patrick W ^a   Stifelman, Michael D ^a  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Minimally invasive surgery; Pyeloplasty; Robotic surgery; Urinary tract reconstruction

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; OPERATION DURATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSOAS HITCH; PYELOPLASTY; REIMPLANTATION; REVIEW; ROBOTIC SURGERY; ROBOTICS; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; URETERAL REIMPLANTATION; URETEROCALICOSTOMY; URETEROLYSIS; URETEROURETEROSTOMY; URINARY TRACT SURGERY; UROLOGY;

ANASTOMOSIS, SURGICAL; HUMANS; KIDNEY; LAPAROSCOPY; ROBOTICS; SURGERY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, MINIMALLY INVASIVE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; URETER; URINARY TRACT; UROLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES;

EID: 55149089047     PISSN: 09630643     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e32830fe43d     Document Type: Review

References (38)

1. Schuessler WW, Grune MT, Tecuanhuey LV, et al. Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty. J Urol 1993; 150:1795-1799.
2. Varkarakis IM, Bhayani SB, Allaf ME, et al. Management of secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction after failed primary laparoscopic pyeloplasty. J Urol 2004; 172:180-182.
3. Fallen E, Ercole B, Lee C, et al. Contemporary management of ureteropelvic junction: Practice patterns in Minnesota. J Endourol 2005; 19:41-44.
4. Tan BJ, Rastinehad AR, Marcovich R, et al. Trends in ureteropelvic junction obstruction management among urologists in the United States. Urology 2005; 65:260-264.
5. Gettman MT, Neururer R, Bartsch G, Peschel R. Anderson-Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty performed using the da Vinci robotic system. Urology 2002; 60:509-513.
6. Mufarrij PW, Woods M, Shah OD, et al. Robotic dismembered pyeloplasty: a 6-year, multiinstitutional experience. J Urol (in press). The largest multi-institutional series of robotic pyeloplasty with long-term follow-up. Results demonstrate safety, efficacy, and durability of robotic repairs.
7. Schwentner C, Pelzer A, Neururer R, et al. Robotic Anderson-Hynes pyeloplasty: 5-year experience of one centre. BJU Int 2007; 100:880-885.
8. Patel V. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty. Urology 2005; 66:45-49.
9. Palese MA, Stifelman MD, Munver R, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty: a combined experience. J Endourol 2005; 19:382-386.
10. Palese MA, Munver R, Phillips CK, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty. JSLS 2005; 9:252-257.
11. Bentas W, Wolfram M, Brautigam R, et al. Da Vinci robot assisted Anderson-Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty: technique and 1 year follow-up. World J Urol 2004; 21:133-138.
12. Gettman MT, Peschel R, Reururer R, et al. A comparison of laparoscopic pyeloplasty performed with the daVinci robotic system versus standard laparoscopic techniques: initial clinical results. Eur Urol 2002; 42:453-457.
13. Link RE, Bhayani SB, Kavoussi LR. A prospective comparison of robotic and laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Ann Surg 2006; 243:486-491.
14. Bernie JE, Venkatesh R, Brown J, et al. Comparison of laparoscopic pyeloplasty with and without robotic assistance. JSLS 2005; 9:258-261.
15. Weise ES, Winfield HN. Robotic computer-assisted pyeloplasty versus conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty. J Endourol 2006; 20:813-819.
16. Bhayani SB, Link RE, Varkarakis JM, Kavoussi LR. Complete daVinci versus laparoscopic pyeloplasty: cost analysis. J Endourol 2005; 19:327-332.
17. Inagaki T, Rha KH, Ong AM, et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: current status. BJU Int 2005; 95 (Suppl 2):102-105.
18. Dimarco DS, Gettman MT, McGee SM, et al. Long-term success of antegrade endopyelotomy compared with pyeloplasty at a single institution. J Endourol 2006; 20:707-712.
19. Psooy K, Pike JG, Leonard MP. Long-term follow-up of pediatric dismembered pyeloplasty: how long is long enough? J Urol 2003; 169:1809-1812.
20. El-Shazly MA, Moon DA, Eden CG. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: status and review of literature. J Endourol 2007; 21:673-678.
21. Sundaram CP, Grubb RL III, Rehman J, et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty for secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J Urol 2003; 169:2037-2040.
22. Rabah DM, Alyami FA. Robotic-assisted transperitoneal radical prostatectomy in a patient with pelvic kidney [abstract]. Saudi Med J 2008; 29:288-290.
23. Kumar R, Yadav R, Kolla SB. Case report: Simultaneous bilateral robotassisted dismembered pyeloplasties for bilateral ureteropelvic junction obstruction: technique and literature review. J Endourol 2008; 21:750-753.
24. Calvert RC, Moray MM, Zelhof B, et al. Comparison of laparoscopic and open pyeloplasty in 100 patients with pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction. Surg Endosc 2008; 22:411-414.
25. Jarrett TW, Chan DY, Charambura TC, et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: the first 100 cases. J Urol 2002; 167:1253-1256.
26. Yohannes P, Rotariu PE, Pinto P, et al. Comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic skills: Is there a difference in the learning curve? Urology 2002; 60:39-45.
27. Simmons MN, Gill IS, Fergany AF, et al. Laparoscopic ureteral reconstruction for benign stricture disease. Urology 2007; 69:280-284.
28. Korets R, Hyams ES, Shah OD, Stifelman MD. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic ureterocalicostomy. Urology 2007; 70:366-369.
29. Vanlangendonck R, Venkatesh R, Vulin C, et al. Laparoscopic ureterocali-costomy: development of a technique simplified by application of Nitinol clips and a wet monopolar electrosurgery device. J Endourol 2005; 19:225-229.
30. Gill IS, Cherullo EE, Steinberg AP, et al. Laparoscopic ureterocalicostomy: initial experience. J Urol 2007; 171:1227-1230.
31. Mufarrij PW, Shah OD, Berger AD, Stifelman MD. Robotic reconstruction of the upper urinary tract. J Urol 2007; 178:2002-2005. First series of robotic upper tract reconstructive procedures in the literature to describe a center's total experience with various ureteral and ureteropelvic reconstructions.
32. Yohannes P, Chiou RK, Pelinkovic D. Pure robot-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation for ureteral stricture disease: Case report. J Endourol 2003; 17:891-893.
33. Dinlenc CZ, Gerber E, Wagner JR. Ureteral reimplantation during robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2004; 172:905.
34. Naeyer GD, Van Migern P, Schatteman P, et al. Pure robot-assisted psoas hitch ureteral reimplantation for distal-ureteral stenosis. J Endourol 2007; 21:618-620.
35. Uberoi J, Harnisch B, Sethi AS, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic distal ureterectomy and ureteral reimplantation with psoas hitch. J Endourol 2007; 21:372-373.
36. Yee DS, Shanberg AM. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic ureteroureterostomy in an adolescent with an obstructed upper pole system and crossed renal ectopia with fusion. Urology 2006; 68:673.e5-677.e5.
37. Srinivasan AK, Richstone L, Permpongkosol S, Kavoussi LR. Comparison of laparoscopic with open approach for ureterolysis in patients with retroperitoneal fibrosis. J Urol 2008; 179:1875-1878.
38. Stifelman MD, Shah O, Mufarrij P, Lipkin M. Minimally invasive management of retroperitoneal fibrosis. Urology 2008; 71:201-204. The first systematic review of robotic ureterolysis in comparison with the laparoscopic technique. Low morbidity, high success rates, and possibly better shortterm outcomes compared with laparoscopic ureterolysis are demonstrated.