Division of Pediatric Urology, Department of Nephrology-Urology, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital and Research Institute, Rome, Italy.
We propose 1-port retroperitoneoscopic assisted pyeloplasty as a minimally invasive approach and compare the results to open dismembered pyeloplasty.
All patients 6 months to 5 years old presenting with ureteropelvic junction obstruction between January 2008 and June 2009 were offered 1-port retroperitoneoscopic assisted pyeloplasty. Age matched patients who underwent open dismembered pyeloplasty during 2007 served as controls. The ureteropelvic junction was isolated retroperitoneoscopically and exteriorized through a single operative trocar. Pyeloplasty was performed in an open fashion with Double-J® stenting. Operative time, postoperative pain, surgical complications, hospital stay, ultrasound and mercaptoacetyltriglycine nuclear scan results at 6-month followup were evaluated and compared. Chi-square test and Student's t test were adopted for statistical analysis, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant.
A total of 28 children (17 males) with a mean age of 18 months were treated with 1-port retroperitoneoscopic assisted pyeloplasty (18 left side). The control group consisted of 25 patients (11 males) with a mean age of 19 months who underwent open dismembered pyeloplasty (10 left side). Median operative time was 95 minutes (range 70 to 130) in 1-port retroperitoneoscopic assisted pyeloplasty and 72 minutes (58 to 102) in open dismembered pyeloplasty (p < 0.05). Median postoperative hospital stay was 2.4 days with the 1-port approach and 6.1 days with the open procedure (p < 0.05). Postoperative pain was significantly less in the 1-port group. Skin scar length was 1.4 to 2.9 cm (median 1.7) with 1-port retroperitoneoscopic assisted pyeloplasty and 3.5 to 6.0 cm (4.3) in the open group (p < 0.05).
The 1-port retroperitoneoscopic assisted pyeloplasty represents a safe and effective minimally invasive technique to treat hydronephrosis and could be the treatment of choice in young children. The procedure does not require laparoscopic suturing skills, and combines the advantages of open and laparoscopic pyeloplasty.
Caione P, Lais A, Nappo SG. Are you the author?
Reference: J Urol. 2010 Nov;184(5):2109-15.