Comparison of Flank, Dorsal Lumbotomy and Laparoscopic Approaches for Dismembered Pyeloplasty in Children Older Than 3 Years With Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction

Journal of Urology

Volumn 183, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 306-311

  Braga, Luis H P ^a   Lorenzo, Armando J ^b   Bägli, Darius J ^b   Mahdi, Mohamed ^b   Salle, Joao L Pippi ^b   Khoury, Antoine E ^c   Farhat, Walid A ^b  

^a MCMASTER CHILDREN S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b HOSPITAL FOR SICK CHILDREN   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

child; kidney pelvis; laparoscopy; postoperative complications; ureteral obstruction

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHILD; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DORSAL LUMBOTOMY; FEMALE; FLANK INCISION; FOLLOW UP; GROUPS BY AGE; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; INCISION; LAPAROSCOPIC PYELOPLASTY; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LENGTH OF STAY; MALE; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; OPERATION DURATION; PERFORMANCE; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PYELOGRAPHY; PYELOPLASTY; SCHOOL CHILD; SURGEON; TREATMENT FAILURE; URETEROPELVIC JUNCTION OBSTRUCTION; UROLOGIC SURGERY;

ADOLESCENT; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; FEMALE; HUMANS; KIDNEY PELVIS; LAPAROSCOPY; LENGTH OF STAY; MALE; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; URETERAL OBSTRUCTION; UROLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES;

EID: 71249122655     PISSN: 00225347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2009.09.008     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Chamie K., Tanaka S.T., Hu B., et al. Short stay pyeloplasty: variables affecting pain and length of stay. J Urol 179 (2008) 1549
2. Winfield H.N. Management of adult ureteropelvic junction obstruction-is it time for a new gold standard?. J Urol 176 (2006) 866
3. Chacko J.K., Koyle A.M., Mingin G.C., et al. The minimally invasive open pyeloplasty. J Pediatr Urol 2 (2006) 368
4. Metzelder M.L., Schier F., Petersen C., et al. Laparoscopic transabdominal pyeloplasty in children is feasible irrespective of age. J Urol 175 (2006) 688
5. Tanaka S.T., Grantham J.A., Thomas J.C., et al. A comparison of open vs laparoscopic pediatric pyeloplasty using the pediatric health information system database-do benefits of laparoscopic approach recede at younger ages?. J Urol 180 (2008) 1479
6. Kumar R., and Smith G. Dorsal lumbotomy incision for pediatric pyeloplasty: a good alternative. Pediatr Surg Int 15 (1999) 562
7. Braga L.H., Pippi-Salle J., Lorenzo A.J., et al. Pediatric laparoscopic pyeloplasty in a referral center: lessons learned. J Endourol 21 (2007) 738
8. Sutherland R.W., Chung S.K., Roth D.R., et al. Pediatric pyeloplasty: outcome analysis based on patient age and surgical technique. Urology 50 (1997) 963
9. Kutikov A., Resnick M., and Casale P. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty in the infant younger than 6 months-is it technically possible?. J Urol 175 (2006) 1477
10. Cascio S., Tien A., Chee W., et al. Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty in children younger than 2 years. J Urol 177 (2007) 335
11. Bonnard A., Fouquet V., Carricaburu E., et al. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty in children. J Urol 173 (2005) 1710
12. Ravish I.R., Nerli R.B., Reddy M.N., et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty compared with open pyeloplasty in children. J Endourol 21 (2007) 897
13. Piaggio L.A., Franc-Guimond J., Noh P.H., et al. Transperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty for primary repair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction in infants and children: comparison with open surgery. J Urol 178 (2007) 1579
14. Lee R.S., Retik A.B., Borer J.G., et al. Pediatric robot assisted laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty: comparison with a cohort of open surgery. J Urol 175 (2006) 683
15. Yee D.S., Shanberg A.M., Duel B.P., et al. Initial comparison of robotic-assisted laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty in children. Urology 67 (2006) 599
16. Kim S., Canter D., Leone N., et al. A comparative study between laparoscopic and robotically assisted pyeloplasty in the pediatric population. J Urol 179 suppl (2008) 357 abstract 1037
17. Braga L.H., Pace K., DeMaria J., et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty for patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction: effect on operative time, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, and success rate. Eur Urol 56 (2009) 848
18. Nerli R.B., Reddy M., Prabha V., et al. Complications of laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children. Pediatr Surg Int 25 (2009) 343
19. Lam P.N., Wong C., Mulholland T.L., et al. Pediatric laparoscopic pyeloplasty: 4-year experience. J Endourol 21 (2007) 1467
20. Wiener J.S., and Roth D.R. Outcome based comparison of surgical approaches for pediatric pyeloplasty: dorsal lumbar versus flank incision. J Urol 159 (1998) 2116