Published in:
01-02-2008
Comparison of laparoscopic and open pyeloplasty in 100 patients with pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction
Authors:
R. C. Calvert, M. M. Morsy, B. Zelhof, M. Rhodes, N. A. Burgess
Published in:
Surgical Endoscopy
|
Issue 2/2008
Login to get access
Abstract
Background
This study aimed to determine whether the morbidity and outcome rates for laparoscopic transperitoneal dismembered pyeloplasty are different from those for dismembered pyeloplasty, to analyze the learning curve of laparoscopic pyeloplasty, and to determine whether preoperative stent placement affects outcome.
Methods
For this study, 49 laparoscopic pyeloplasties (period 2000–2005) and 51 open pyeloplasties (period 1992–2003) were reviewed.
Results
Compared with open procedures, laparoscopic procedures were associated with a longer mean operating time (159 vs 91 min; p < 0.001), a shorter mean time to normal diet (38 vs 72 h; p < 0.001), and a similar mean hospital stay (5 days; p = 0.6). The operative complication rates were 17% for primary laparoscopic pyeloplasties and 24% for primary open pyeloplasties. The rates were higher for secondary procedures. The success rates for primary and secondary procedures were, respectively, 98% (41/42) and 57% (4/7) for laparoscopy and 96% (46/48) and 67% (2/3) for open surgery. Failed procedures showed no improvement in loin pain or obstruction. At the 6-month follow-up evaluation, 29% of the open surgery patients but none of the laparoscopic surgery patients reported wound pain.
Conclusions
The efficacy of laparoscopic pyeloplasty is equivalent to that of open pyeloplasty, with less wound pain at 6 months. The outcome for secondary procedures is inferior. There was a trend toward a reduction in complications and the conversion rates with time, suggesting that there may be a learning curve of approximately 30 laparoscopic pyeloplasty cases. Preoperative stent insertion did not seem to affect any objective measures of outcome for laparoscopic pyeloplasty.