» Articles » PMID: 17162086

Laparoscopic Dismembered Pyeloplasty in Children Younger Than 2 Years

Overview
Journal J Urol
Publisher Wolters Kluwer
Specialty Urology
Date 2006 Dec 13
PMID 17162086
Citations 16
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: Since the first laparoscopic pyeloplasty was described in a child in 1995, there have been several reports of pyeloplasty in older children. However, to date there have been few reports of laparoscopic pyeloplasty in infants and toddlers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children younger than 2 years.

Materials And Methods: All laparoscopic Anderson-Hynes pyeloplasties performed in children younger than 2 years were retrospectively reviewed. The diagnosis of ureteropelvic junction obstruction was confirmed on renal sonography and diuretic renogram. Laparoscopic pyeloplasties were performed via a transperitoneal route as originally described, with key modifications. All children were investigated with postoperative diuretic renogram and renal ultrasonography.

Results: A total of 38 children with ureteropelvic junction obstruction underwent laparoscopic Anderson-Hynes pyeloplasty between January 2001 and December 2005. Of these patients 11 (7 males and 4 females) were younger than 2 years at surgery (median 1.4, range 2 to 22 months) and 1 had bilateral ureteropelvic junction obstruction, for a total of 12 primary repairs. However, 2 patients (17%) required redo laparoscopic pyeloplasty, for a total of 14 laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasties in this age group. Operative time ranged from 70 to 140 minutes (mean 100) and median hospital stay was 2 days. Followup studies showed normal drainage in all patients except 1, who after redo pyeloplasty exhibited significantly improved but still prolonged drainage.

Conclusions: This study suggests that laparoscopic pyeloplasty can now be performed in young children with good results.

Citing Articles

Laparoscopic pyeloplasty in neonates and infants is safe and efficient.

Langreen S, Ludwikowski B, Dingemann J, Ure B, Hofmann A, Kuebler J Front Pediatr. 2024; 12:1397614.

PMID: 39132308 PMC: 11310035. DOI: 10.3389/fped.2024.1397614.


Techniques in minimally invasive transperitoneal pyeloplasty: A compilation.

Mallikarjuna C, Ghouse S, Madduri V, Bendigeri M, Enganti B, Reddy P Urol Ann. 2024; 16(1):52-59.

PMID: 38415227 PMC: 10896333. DOI: 10.4103/ua.ua_38_23.


Are weight or age limits for pediatric laparoscopic pyeloplasty? Results of a multicentric study.

Reed F, Recabal X, Echeverria P, Braga L, Cherian A, Gatti J World J Urol. 2023; 41(6):1675-1679.

PMID: 36947174 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-023-04359-2.


Outcome analysis of immediate and delayed laparoscopic pyeloplasty in infants with severe ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

Bao Q, Ma W, Zhang X, Chen S, Luo J, Zhang G Front Pediatr. 2022; 10:1022836.

PMID: 36340702 PMC: 9627154. DOI: 10.3389/fped.2022.1022836.


Attaining competency and proficiency in open pyeloplasty: a learning curve configuration using cumulative sum analysis.

Kim J, Chua M, Rickard M, Milford K, Keefe D, Lorenzo A Int Urol Nephrol. 2022; 54(8):1857-1863.

PMID: 35588341 DOI: 10.1007/s11255-022-03229-x.