Home
October 2009 November 2009 December 2009
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
Week 45 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Week 46 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Week 47 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Week 48 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Week 49 29 30
Reach urologists

Perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing conventional laparoscopic versus laparoendoscopic single-site pyeloplasty - Abstract Show Comments PDF Print E-mail
  
Friday, 25 September 2009

University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa; University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.

To compare the outcomes of laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery with conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty (CLP) before LESS can be widely accepted. LESS surgery is a novel technique for performing laparoscopic pyeloplasty through a single incision.

Fourteen patients undergoing less pyeloplasty were matched 2:1 with regard to age and side of surgery to a previous cohort of 28 patients who underwent CLP. All patients underwent surgery for symptomatic ureteropelvic junction obstruction and/or delayed urinary excretion based on functional imaging. Intracorporeal suturing was aided through a 5-mm instrument placed in the eventual drain site.

No difference was observed between the LESS and CLP cohorts in regard to preoperative characteristics. Postoperatively, no difference was noted between LESS and CLP cases in regard to length of stay (77 vs 74 hours; P = .69), morphine equivalents required (34 vs 38; P = .93), minor postoperative complications (14.3% vs 14.3%; P = 1.0), or major postoperative complications (21.4% vs 10%; P = .18). Median operative times (207 vs 237.5 minutes; P < .001) and median estimated blood loss (30 vs 72.5 mL; P = .002) were lower in patients undergoing LESS. Detailed follow-up imaging revealed a success rate of 96% for CLP at 14.6 months (86% follow-up) and 100% for LESS at 6.8 months (71% follow-up).

Although LESS pyeloplasty is feasible, all measured perioperative outcomes are similar to CLP. Further studies are needed to better define the appropriate role of LESS surgery in urology.

Written by:
Tracy CR, Raman JD, Bagrodia A, Cadeddu JA.   Are you the author?

Reference:
Urology. 2009 Aug 4. Epub ahead of print.
doi:10.1016/j.urology.2009.04.089

PubMed Abstract
PMID:19660793

UroToday.com Laparoscopic and Robotic Section

Reader Comments

Please log-in or register in order to submit comments.

Powered by AkoComment!

 
User Rating: / 0
PoorBest


 

Bookmark and Share
Next >

Member's Section

Login

Sign Up

Quick Search

Meet the Expert


All Experts


Featured Conference

Media and Publisher

Advertising Rates
Reprints

Working with Industry

Case Studies
Sponsorship Opportunities

Craft of Urologic
Surgery Sponsored By