Abstract

BESTARD VALLEJO, Juan E. et al. Open versus laparoscopic pyeloplasty: review of our series and description of our laparoscopic pyeloplasty procedure. Actas Urol Esp [online]. 2009, vol.33, n.9, pp.994-999. ISSN 0210-4806.

Introduction and objectives: Pyeloplasty has always been the treatment of choice for ureteropelvic junction obstruction at our center, where a laparoscopic approach has been used in the last 4 years to perform this procedure. Results of open pyeloplasty (OP) and laparoscopic pyeloplasty (LP) performed at our center in the past 8 years are compared, and our laparoscopic procedure is described. Materials and methods: Pyeloplasties performed at our center from June 2000 to June 2008 were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical presentation, involved kidney function, operating time, intraoperatory bleeding, presence of kidney stones or crossing vessels, length of hospital stay, possible complications, and results obtained were analyzed in each case. Results: Thirty pyeloplasties were performed, 15 OP and 15 LP (50%). Mean operating time was 167.6 minutes for LP (100-240) and 106 minutes for OP (75-180) (P<.0001). Mean hospital stay was 6.6 days (4-16) for LP and 9.1 days for OP (5-26) (P>.05). Intraoperative bleeding was negligible in all patients and no peroperative complications occurred. However, 9 patients (30%) experienced postoperative complications, 5 out of 15 LPs (33.3%) and 4 out of 15 OPs (26.7%) (P>.05). Urinary fistula was the most common complication, occurring in 3 of the 30 patients (10%). Procedure was successful in all 15 patients undergoing OP (100%) and in 14 of the 15 patients undergoing LP (93.3%) (P>.05). Conclusions: LP is currently the procedure of choice at our center because of its lower morbidity and similar results to OP, despite the need for a certain laparoscopic skill and a usually longer opertating time.

Keywords : Pyeloplasty; Laparoscopy; Ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

        · abstract in Spanish     · text in Spanish     · Spanish ( pdf )