Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Current Urology Reports
Published in: Current Urology Reports 10/2015

01-10-2015 | Pediatric Urology (M Castellan and R Gosalbez, Section Editors)

Surgical Approaches to Pediatric Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction

Authors: Ryan W. Tubre, John M. Gatti

Published in: Current Urology Reports | Issue 10/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Approximately 10–30 % of infants with hydronephrosis are found to have ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction. Technological advances in imaging have allowed physicians to better identify the location of the obstruction. The classic repair is the Anderson-Hynes repair which shows a 90–100 % success rate and appears superior to many less complex techniques. Is it best to approach this repair through an open incision or laparoscopically with or without a surgical robot? That question remains to be answered and largely depends on how you define “best.”
Literature
1.
Lee RS, Borer JG. Perinatal urology. Campbell-Walsh Urology e4. Ch 114, 3048–3066.
2.
Vogt BA and Dell KM. The kidney and urinary tract of the neonate. Fanaroff and Martin’s Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine, Chp 101, 1676–1699.
3.
Chandrasekharam VV, Srinivas M, Bal CS, Gupta AK, Agarwala S, Mitra DK, et al. Functional outcome after pyeloplasty for unilateral symptomatic hydronephrosis. Pediatr Surg Int. 2001;17:524–7.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Kato Y, Yamataka A, Okazaki T, Yanai T, Lane GJ, Kobayashi H, et al. Surgical treatment and outcome of megahydronephrosis due to PUJ stenosis. Pediatr Surg Int. 2006;22:911–3.CrossRefPubMed
5.•
Knoedler J, Han L, Granberg C, Kramer S, Chow G, et al. Population-based comparison of laparoscopic and open pyeloplasty in paediatric pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction. BJU Int. 2013;111:1141–7. This is a recent article showing that complication rates between open and laparoscopic repairs are similar.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Schulam P. Chapter 9. Ureteropelvic junction obstruction. In: Litwin MS, Saigal CS, editors. Urologic Diseases in America US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office; 2007. p. 323–32.
7.
Garg R, Menon P, Rao K, Arora S, Batra Y. Pyeloplasty for hydronephrosis: issues of double J stent versus nephrostomy tube as drainage technique. J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg. 2015;20(1):32–6.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
8.
Kavoussi LR, Peters CA. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty. J Urol. 1993;150:1891–4.PubMed
9.
Marshall L, Lowe FC, Marshall SF. Ureteropelvic junction obstruction in adults. Urology. 1984;23:331–5.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Stephens FD. Ureterovascular hydronephrosis and the “aberrant” renal vessels. J Urol. 1982;128:984–7.PubMed
11.
Nerli RB, Reddy MN, Jali SM, Hiremath MB. Preliminary experience with laparoscopic Foley’s YV plasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children. J Minim Access Surg. 2014;10(2):72–5.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
12.
Braga LH, Lorenzo AJ, Bagli DJ, et al. Comparison of flank, dorsal lumbotomy and laparoscopic approaches for dismembered pyeloplasty in children older than 3 years with ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J Urol. 2010;183(1):306–11.CrossRefPubMed
13.
14.
15.
Webber RJ, Pandian SS, McClinton S, Hussey J. Retrograde balloon dilatation for pelviureter junction obstruction: long-term follow-up. J Endourol. 1997;11(4):239–42.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Weikert S, Christoph F, Muller M, Schostak M, Miller K, Schrader M. Acucise endopyelotomy: a technique with limited efficacy for primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction in adults. Int J Urol. 2005;12(10):864–8.CrossRefPubMed
17.
18.
Kim FJ, Herrell SD, Jahoda AE, Albala DM. Complications of acucise endopyelotomy. J Endourol. 1998;12:433–6.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Preminger GM, Clayman RV, Nakada SY, et al. A multicenter clinical trial investigating the use of a fluoroscopically controlled cutting balloon catheter for the management of ureteral and ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J Urol. 1997;157:1625–9.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Shalhav AL, Giusti G, Elbahnasy M, et al. Adult endopyelotomy: impact of etiology and antegrade versus retrograde approach on outcome. J Urol. 1998;160:685–9.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Gill HS, Liao JC. Pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction treated with acucise retrograde endopyelotomy. Br J Urol. 1998;82:8–11.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Biyani CS, Minhas S, el Cast J, Almond DJ, Cooksey G, Hetherington JW. The role of acucise endopyelotomy in the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Eur Urol. 2002;41:305–10. discussion 10–11.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Sharma SK, Klopukh BV, Turk TM. Long term study of the efficacy of acucise endopyelotomy for primary and secondary UPJ obstruction. J Urol. 2003;169:24. (Abstract) 95.CrossRef
24.
Schuessler WW, Grune MT, Tecuanhuey LV, et al. Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty. J Urol. 1993;150:1795–9.PubMed
25.
Piaggio LA, Franc-Guimond J, Noh PH, et al. Transperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty for primary repair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction in infants and children: comparison with open surgery. J Urol. 2007;178:1579–83.CrossRefPubMed
26.
O’Reilly PH, Brooman PJ, Mak S, et al. The long-term results of Anderson-Hynes pyeloplasty. BJU Int. 2001;87:287–9.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Oberlin DT, McGuire BB, Pilecki M, et al. Contemporary national surgical outcomes in the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Urology. 2015;85(2):363–7.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Ravish IR, Nerli RB, Reddy MN, et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty compared with open pyeloplasty in children. J Endourol. 2007;21:897–902.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Bansal D, Cost NG, Bean CM, et al. Infant robot-assisted laparoscopic upper urinary tract reconstructive surgery. J Pediatr Urol. 2014;10(5):869–74.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Bansal D, Cost NG, DeFoor WR, et al. Infant robotic pyeloplasty: comparison with an open cohort. J Pediatr Urol. 2014;10:380–5.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Reddy MN, Nerli RB. The laparoscopic pyeloplasty: is there a role in the age of robotics? Urol Clin North Am. 2015;42(1):43–52.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Varda BK, Johnson EK, et al. National trends of perioperative outcomes and costs or open, laparoscopic and robotic pediatric population. J Urol. 2014;191:1090–6.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
33.
Lindgren BW, Hagerty J, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic reoperative repair for failed pyeloplasty in children: a safe and highly effective treatment option. J Urol. 2012;188:932–7.CrossRefPubMed
34.
McNeil BK, Flanigan RC. Complications of open renal surgery. Complications Urol Surg Pract 2007. Pp 65–80.
35.
36.
37.
Lee HE, Park K, Choi H. An analysis of long-term occurrence of renal complications following pediatric pyeloplasty. J Pediatr Urol. 2014;10(6):1083–8.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Elmalik K, Chowdhury MM, Capps SNJ. Ureteric stents in pyeloplasty: a help or a hindrance? J Pediatr Urol. 2008;4:275–9.CrossRefPubMed
39.•
Kim J, Sungchan P, Hwang H, Kim JW, Cheon SH, Park S, et al. Comparison of surgical outcomes between dismembered pyeloplasty with or without ureteral stenting in children with ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Korean J Urol. 2012;53:564–8. This articles challenges earlier articles which showed the need for ureteral stent placement at the time of repair.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
40.
Smith KE, Holmes N, Lieb JI, et al. Stented versus nonstented pediatric pyeloplasty: a modern series and review of the literature. J Urol. 2002;168:1127–30.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Siddique M, Pansota MS, Saleem MS, Attique-ur-Rehman. Outcome of pyeloplasty in children. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad 2014;26(1).
42.••
Braga LHP, Lorenzo AJ, et al. Failed pyeloplasty in children: comparative analysis of retrograde endopyelotomy versus redo pyeloplasty. J Urol. 2007;178:2571–5. This is a good article that compares endopyelotomy to pyeloplasty. The results are very favorable for performing a pyeloplasty, even in those that fail a primary repair.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Vannahme M, Mathur S, Davenport K, Timoney AG, Keeley Jr FX. The management of secondary pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction—a comparison of pyeloplasty and endopyelotomy. BJU Int. 2014;113(1):108–12.CrossRefPubMed
44.••
Penn HA, Gatti JM, Hoestje SM, DeMarco RT, Snyder CL, Murphy JP. Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty in children: preliminary report of a prospective randomized trial. J Urol. 2010;184(2):690–5. This is a prospective randomized trial comparing laparoscopic vs open dismembered pyeloplasty with 39 pediatric patients.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Albertson P. Robotic vs open RP: who pays the cost? Urologytimes.com. September 2012. Vol 40. No 10.
46.
Lee JY, Mucksavage P, Kerbl DC, Huynh VB, Etafy M, McDougall EM. Validation study of a virtual reality robotic simulator—role as an assessment tool? J Urol. 2012;187(3):998–1002.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Passerotti CC, Passerotti AM, Dall’Oglio MF, Leite KR, Nunes RL, Srougi M, et al. Comparing the quality of the suture anastomosis and the learning curves associated with performing open, freehand, and robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in a swine animal model. J Am Coll Surg. 2009;208(4):576–86.CrossRefPubMed
48.
Duchene DA, Rossa F, Clayman R, McDougall EM, Winfield HN. Current minimally invasive practice patterns among postgraduate urologists. J Endourol. 2011;25(11):1797–804.CrossRefPubMed
49.
Autorino R, White WM, Gettman MT, Khalifeh A, De Sio M, Lima E, et al. Public perception of “scarless” surgery: a critical analysis of the literature. Urology. 2012;80(3):495–502.CrossRefPubMed
50.
Gargollo PC. Hidden incision endoscopic surgery, description of technique, parental satisfaction and applications. J Urol. 2011;185(4):1425–31.CrossRefPubMed
51.
Kilbansky D, Rothstein RI. Robotics in endoscopy. Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2012;28(5):477–82.CrossRef
52.
Zygomalas A, Kehagias I, Giokas K, Koutsouris D. Miniature surgical robots in the era of notes and less: dream or reality? Surg Innov. 2015;22(1):97–107.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Surgical Approaches to Pediatric Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction
Authors
Ryan W. Tubre
John M. Gatti
Publication date
01-10-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Current Urology Reports / Issue 10/2015
Print ISSN: 1527-2737
Electronic ISSN: 1534-6285
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-015-0539-1

Other articles of this Issue 10/2015

Current Urology Reports 10/2015 Go to the issue

Urothelial Cancer (A Sagalowsky, Section Editor)

Obesity, Physical Activity and Bladder Cancer

Genetics and Microenvironment (X Cathelineau, Section Editor)

What is the Need for Prostatic Biomarkers in Prostate Cancer Management?

Pediatric Urology (M Castellan and R Gosalbez, Section Editors)

Update on Multicystic Dysplastic Kidney

Pediatric Urology (M Castellan and R Gosalbez, Section Editors)

Surgery for Primary Proximal Hypospadias with Ventral Curvature >30°

Pediatric Urology (M Castellan and R Gosalbez, Section Editors)

Laparoscopic Single-Site Surgery in Pediatric Urology: Where Do We Stand Today?

Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (K McVary, Section Editor)

Placebo Medication and Sham Surgery Responses in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Treatments: Implications for Clinical Trials