Correction of ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children: National trends and comparative effectiveness in operative outcomes

Journal of Endourology

Volumn 28, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 592-598

  Sukumar, Shyam ^a   Roghmann, Florian ^b,c   Sood, Akshay ^d,e   Abdo, Al'A ^b   Menon, Mani ^d,e   Sammon, Jesse D ^d,e   Sun, Maxine ^b   Varda, Briony ^f   Trinh, Quoc Dien ^d,e,f   Elder, Jack S ^d,e,g  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b CENTRE HOSPITALIER DE L UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^c RUHR UNIVERSITY BOCHUM   (Germany)

^d HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

^e Vattikuti Urology Institute VUI Center for Outcomes Research Analytics and Evaluation   (United States)

^f BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^g CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; BLOOD TRANSFUSION; CHILD; CHILDHOOD DISEASE; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; CONTROLLED STUDY; ENDOPYELOTOMY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HOSPITAL CHARGE; HUMAN; INFANT; LAPAROSCOPIC PYELOPLASTY; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LENGTH OF STAY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PEROPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PYELOPLASTY; RISK FACTOR; ROBOT ASSISTED PYELOPLASTY; ROBOTICS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; URETEROPELVIC JUNCTION OBSTRUCTION; URINARY TRACT SURGERY;

ADOLESCENT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; BLOOD TRANSFUSION; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTRAOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; KIDNEY PELVIS; LAPAROSCOPY; LENGTH OF STAY; MALE; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; ROBOTICS; SEX DISTRIBUTION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES; URETER; URETERAL OBSTRUCTION;

EID: 84899030151     PISSN: 08927790     EISSN: 1557900X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/end.2013.0618     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Anderson JC, Hynes W. Retrocaval ureter: A case diagnosed pre-operatively and treated successfully by a plastic operation. Br J Urol 1949;21:209-214.
2. Sukumar S, Sun M, Karakiewicz PI, et al. National trends and disparities in the use of minimally invasive adult pyeloplasty. J Urol 2012;188:913-918.
3. Casale P, Grady RW, Joyner BD, et al. Comparison of dismembered and nondismembered laparoscopic pyeloplasty in the pediatric patient. J Endourol 2004;18:875-878.
4. Minnillo BJ, Cruz JA, Sayao RH, et al. Long-term experience and outcomes of robotic assisted laparoscopic pye-loplasty in children and young adults. J Urol 2011;185: 1455-1460.
5. Kim EH, Tanagho YS, Traxel EJ, et al. Endopyelotomy for pediatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction: A review of our 25-year experience. J Urol 2012;188(suppl 4):1628-1633.
6. Monn MF, Bahler CD, Schneider EB, et al. Trends in robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in pediatric patients. Urology 2013;81:1336-1341.
7. Dash A, Dunn RL, Resh J, et al. Patient, surgeon, and treatment characteristics associated with homologous blood transfusion requirement during radical retropubic prostatectomy: Multivariate nomogram to assist patient counseling. Urology 2004;64:117-122.
8. Hu JC, Wang Q, Pashos CL, et al. Utilization and outcomes of minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:2278-2284.
9. Joudi FN, Allareddy V, Kane CJ, Konety BR. Analysis of complications following partial and total nephrectomy for renal cancer in a population based sample. J Urol 2007;177: 1709-1714.
10. Trinh QD, Sun M, Sammon J, et al. Leapfrog volume thresholds and perioperative complications after radical prostatectomy. Cancer 2012;118:4991-4998.
11. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: Development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987;40:373-383.
12. Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Ciol MA. Adapting a clinical co-morbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 1992;45:613-619.
13. Nelson CP, Park JM, Dunn RL, Wei JT. Contemporary trends in surgical correction of pediatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction: Data from the nationwide inpatient sample. J Urol 2005;173:232-236.
14. Vemulakonda VM, Cowan CA, Lendvay TS, et al. Surgical management of congenital ureteropelvic junction obstruction: A Pediatric Health Information System database study. J Urol 2008;180(suppl 4):1689-1692.
15. Tanaka ST, Grantham JA, Thomas JC, 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 2008;180:1479-1485.
16. Chacko JK, Koyle MA, Mingin GC, Furness PD, 3rd. Minimally invasive open renal surgery. J Urol 2007;178: 1575-1578.
17. Liss ZJ, Olsen TM, Roelof BA, Steinhardt GF. Duration of urinary leakage after open non-stented dismembered pyelo-plasty in pediatric patients. J Pediatr Urol 2013;9:613-616.
18. Trinh QD, Sammon J, Sun M, et al. Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open radical prostatectomy: Results from the nationwide inpa-tient sample. Eur Urol 2012;61:679-685.
19. Penn HA, Gatti JM, Hoestje SM, et al. Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty in children: Preliminary report of a prospective randomized trial. J Urol 2010;184:690-695.
20. Ramirez M, Chang DC, Bickler SW. Pediatric injury outcomes in racial/ethnic minorities in California: Diversity may reduce disparity. Arch Surg 2013;148:76-80.