The Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Is There a Role in the Age of Robotics?

Urologic Clinics of North America

Volumn 42, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 43-52

  Reddy, Mallikarjun N ^a   Nerli, Rajendra B ^a  

^a JAWAHARLAL NEHRU MEDICAL COLLEGE   (India)

Author keywords

Da Vinci surgery; Laparoscopy; Minimally invasive surgery; Pediatrics; Robotic surgery; Ureteropelvic junction obstruction

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ENDOSCOPIC SURGERY; HISTORY OF MEDICINE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LENGTH OF STAY; MORBIDITY; PATIENT SAFETY; PLASTIC SURGERY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PYELOPLASTY; RETROPERITONEAL APPROACH; REVIEW; ROBOTICS; SURGICAL ANATOMY; SURGICAL APPROACH; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; URETEROPELVIC JUNCTION OBSTRUCTION; ADOLESCENT; ANASTOMOSIS; CHILD; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HYDRONEPHROSIS; INFANT; KIDNEY PELVIS; LAPAROSCOPY; MALE; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; MULTICYSTIC DYSPLASTIC KIDNEY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PROCEDURES; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURE; SURGERY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; URETER; URETERAL OBSTRUCTION; UROLOGIC SURGERY;

ADOLESCENT; ANASTOMOSIS, SURGICAL; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; HYDRONEPHROSIS; INFANT; KIDNEY PELVIS; LAPAROSCOPY; MALE; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGICAL PROCEDURES; MULTICYSTIC DYSPLASTIC KIDNEY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; TREATMENT OUTCOME; URETER; URETERAL OBSTRUCTION; UROLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES;

EID: 84919339597     PISSN: 00940143     EISSN: 1558318X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ucl.2014.09.004     Document Type: Review

References (40)

1. Brown T., Mandell J., Lebowitz R.L. Neonatal hydronephrosis in the era of sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1987, 148:959-963.
2. Carr M.C., Casale P. Anomalies and surgery of the ureter in children. Campbell-Walsh urology 2012, 3212-3235. Elsevier Saunders, Philadelphia. 10th edition. A.J. Wein, L.R. Kavoussi, A.C. Novick (Eds.).
3. Kavoussi L.R., Peters C.A. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty. JUrol 1993, 150:1891.
4. Schuessler W.W., Grune M.T., Tecuanhuey L.V., et al. Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty. JUrol 1993, 150:1795.
5. Tan H. Laparoscopic Anderson-Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty in children. JUrol 1999, 162:1045.
6. Yeung C.K., Tam Y.H., Sihoe J.D., et al. Retroperitoneoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty for pelviureteric junction obstruction in infants and children. Br J Urol 2001, 87:509.
7. El Ghoneimi A., Farhat W., Bolduc S., et al. Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty by a retroperitoneal approach in children. BJU Int 2003, 92:104.
8. Reddy M., Nerli R.B., Bashetty R., et al. Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty in children. JUrol 2005, 174:700-702.
9. Lopez M., Guye E., Becmeur F., et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty for repair of pelviureteric junction obstruction in children. JLaparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2009, 19(Suppl 1):S91-S93.
10. Metzelder M.L., Schier F., Petersen C., et al. Laparoscopic transabdominal pyeloplasty in children is feasible irrespective of age. JUrol 2006, 175:688-691.
11. Vicentini F.C., Dé nes F.T., Borges L.L., et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children: is the outcome different in children under 2 years of age?. JPediatr Urol 2008, 4:348-351.
12. Sweeney D.D., Ost M.C., Schneck F.X., et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children. JLaparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2011, 21:261-265.
13. Notley R.G., Beaurgie J.M. The long term follow up of Anderson-Hynes pyeloplasty for hydronephrosis. Br J Urol 1973, 45:464.
14. Perksy L., Kraurse J.R., Boltuch R.L. Initial complications and late results in dismembered pyeloplasty. JUrol 1977, 118:162.
15. Soulie M., Thoulouzan M., Seguin P., et al. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty with a minimal incision; Comparison of two surgical approaches. Urology 2001, 57:443.
16. Ravish I.R., Nerli R.B., Reddy M.N., et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty compared with open pyeloplasty in children. JEndourol 2007, 21:897-901.
17. Penn H.A., Gatti J.M., Hoestje S.M., et al. Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty in children: preliminary report of a prospective randomized trial. JUrol 2010, 184:690-695.
18. Tong Q., Zheng L., Tang S., et al. Comparison of laparoscopic-assisted versus open dismembered pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in infants: intermediate results. Urology 2009, 74:889.
19. Bonnard A., Fouquet V., Carricaburu E., et al. Retroperitoneoscopic laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty in children. JUrol 2005, 173:1710.
20. Nerli R.B., Reddy M., Prabha V., et al. Complications of laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children. Pediatr Surg Int 2009, 25:343-347.
21. Janetschek G., Peschel R., Frauscher F. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Urol Clin North Am 2000, 27:695.
22. Chen R.N., Moore R.G., Kavoussi L.R. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Indications, technique, and long-term outcome. Urol Clin North Am 1998, 25:323.
23. Olsen L.H., Jorgensen T.M. Computer assisted pyeloplasty in children: the retroperitoneal approach. JUrol 2004, 171:2629.
24. Atug F., Woods M., Burgess S.V., Castle E.P., Thomas R. Robotic assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children. JUrol 2005, 174:1440-1442.
25. Gettman M., Neururer R., Bartsch G., et al. Anderson-Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty performed using the da Vinci robotic system. Urology 2002, 60:509-513.
26. Yohannes P., Burjonrappa S. Laparoscopic Anderson-Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty using the da Vinci robot: technical considerations. JEndourol 2003, 17:79-83.
27. Gettman M., Peschel R., Neururer R., et al. Acomparison of laparoscopic pyeloplasty performed with the da Vinci robotic system versus standard laparoscopic techniques: initial clinical results. Eur Urol 2002, 42:453-458.
28. Casale P., Kojima Y. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery in pediatric urology: an update. Scand J Surg 2009, 98:110-119.
29. Autorino R., Eden C., El Ghoneimi A., et al. Robot-assisted and laparoscopic repair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2014, 65:430-452.
30. Olsen L.H., Rawashdeh Y.F., Jorgensen T.M. Pediatric robot assisted retroperitoneoscopic pyeloplasty: a 5-year experience. JUrol 2007, 178:2137-2141.
31. Minnillo B.J., Cruz J.A., Sayao R.H., et al. Long-term experience and outcomes of robotic assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children and young adults. JUrol 2011, 185:1455-1460.
32. Singh P., Dogra P.N., Kumar R., et al. Outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children: a single center experience. JEndourol 2012, 26:249-253.
33. Vereczkel A., Bupp H., Feussner H. Laparoscopic surgery and ergonomics-it's time to think on ourselves as well. Surg Endosc 2003, 17:1680-1682.
34. Hemal A.K., Srinivas M., Charles A.R. Ergonomic problems associated with laparoscopy. JEndourol 2001, 15:499-503.
35. Rassweiler J., Binder J., Frede T. Robotic and telesurgery: will they change our future?. Curr Opin Urol 2001, 11:309-320.
36. Breedveld P., Stassen H.G., Meijer D.W., et al. Theoretical background and conceptual solution for depth perception and eye-hand coordination problems in laparoscopic surgery. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 1999, 8:227-234.
37. Link R.E., Bhayani S.B., Kavoussi L.R. Aprospective comparison of robotic and laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Ann Surg 2006, 243(4):486.
38. 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 2009, 56(5):848-858.
39. Rassweiler J., Hruza M., Klein J., et al. The role of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in the era of robotic surgery. Eur Urol Suppl 2010, 9(3):379-387.
40. Schurr M.O., Kunert W., Arezzo A., et al. The role and future of endoscopic imaging systems. Endoscopy 1999, 71:557-562.