Comparison of open, laparoscopic and robot-assisted pyeloplasty for pelviureteric junction obstruction in adult patients
- 18 Downloads
Ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) is a frequently found congenital abnormality of the upper urinary tract treated with pyeloplasty. We hereby report a study to compare open pyeloplasty (OP), laparoscopic pyeloplasty (LP) and robotic assisted pyeloplasty (RAP) for UPJO in terms of functional and perioperative outcomes. 102 patients who underwent Anderson–Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty for UPJO were divided into three groups based on type of surgical techniques utilized as follows: OP (Group A; n = 34), LP (Group B; n = 34), and RAP (Group C; n = 34). Preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative data were recorded. The mean operative time was significantly more in the Group B (187.76 min) than the Group A (132.06 ± 30.1 min) and Group C (136.76 ± 25.1 min) (p < .001). Mean blood loss was more in OP group 86.47 ± 29. 35 ml versus 42.94 ± 20. 77 ml in RAP and 45.59 ± 20. 3 ml in the LP group (p < .001). The LP was found to be much tiring. Mean surgeon fatigue index (SFI) calculated was 7 ± 1.1 in the LP group compared to 4.12 ± 1.1 in RAP group and the difference was statistically significant (p< .001). Average VAS score in the first 2 days postoperatively was 6.66±1.58 in the OP group compared to 4.29 ± 1.16 in RAP group and 4.29 ± 1.31 in the LP group (p < 0.001). Pyeloplasty has a similar success rate and efficacy irrespective of the technique utilized. RAP improves the surgeons QOL (quality of life) and the fatigue scores, which is useful for surgeon longevity. RAP has become widely favorite and can be considered the approach of choice in the management of UPJO wherever infrastructure and finances allow.
KeywordsUreteropelvic junction Pyeloplasty Robotic
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
Shahnawaz Rasool, Mahendra Singh, Saurabh Jain, Sudhir Chaddha, Vipin Tyagi, Mrinal Pahwa and Himnshu Pandey declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000.
Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in the study.
- 3.Simforoosh N, Basiri A, Tabibi A, Danesh AK, Sharifi-Aghdas F, Ziaee SAM et al (2004) A comparison between laparoscopic and open pyeloplasty in patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Urol J 1(3):165–169Google Scholar
- 8.Braga LHP, Pace K, DeMaria J, Lorenzo AJ (2009) 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 56(5):848–857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Başataç C, Boylu U, Önol FF, Gümüş E (2014) Comparison of surgical and functional outcomes of open, laparoscopic and robotic pyeloplasty for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Turk J Urol 40(1):24–30Google Scholar
- 13.Memon MA, Biyabani SR, Ghirano R, Aziz W, Siddiqui KM (2016) Is laparoscopic pyeloplasty a comparable option to treat Ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO)? A comparative study. JPMA J Pak Med Assoc 66(3):324–327Google Scholar