Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty: assessment of objective and subjective outcome.

PURPOSE We determine the subjective and objective durability of laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty. MATERIALS AND METHODS From August 1993 to April 1997, 42 patients underwent laparoscopic pyeloplasty (laparoscopy group) with a minimum clinical followup of 12 months (mean 22). Subjective outcomes and objective findings were compared to those of 35 patients who underwent open pyeloplasty (open surgery group) from August 1986 to April 1997 with a minimum clinical followup of 12 months (mean 58). We assessed clinical outcome based on responses to a subjective analog pain and activity scale. In addition, radiographic outcome was assessed based on the results of the most recent radiographic study. RESULTS Of the 42 laparoscopy group patients 90% (38) were pain-free (26, 62%) or had significant improvement in flank pain (12, 29%) after surgery. Two patients had only minor improvement and 2 had no improvement in pain. Surgery failed in only 1 patient with complete obstruction. A patent ureteropelvic junction was demonstrated in 98% (41 of 42 patients) of the laparoscopy group on the most recent radiographic study (mean radiographic followup 15 months). Of the 35 open surgery group patients 91% were pain-free (21, 60%) or significantly improved (11, 31%) after surgery. One patient had only minor improvement and 2 were worse. CONCLUSIONS Pain relief, improved activity level and relief of obstruction outcomes are equivalent for laparoscopic and open pyeloplasty.

[1]  G. Bartsch,et al.  Laparoscopic and retroperitoneoscopic repair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. , 1996, Urology.

[2]  G. Badlani,et al.  Percutaneous surgery for ureteropelvic junction obstruction (endopyelotomy): technique and early results. , 1986, The Journal of urology.

[3]  R. Clayman,et al.  Laparoscopic pyeloplasty for secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction: preliminary experience. , 1995, Urology.

[4]  D. H. Nguyen,et al.  Nonintubated Anderson-Hynes repair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction in 60 patients. , 1989, The Journal of urology.

[5]  J. W. Segura,et al.  Percutaneous Antegrade Endoscopic Pyelotomy: Review of 50 Consecutive Cases , 1995 .

[6]  R. Clayman,et al.  Endopyelotomy: comparison of ureteroscopic retrograde and antegrade percutaneous techniques. , 1992, The Journal of urology.

[7]  G. Preminger,et al.  Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty. , 1993, The Journal of urology.

[8]  G. Jordan,et al.  Proposal: trauma as the cause of the Peyronie's lesion. , 1996, The Journal of urology.

[9]  P. V. Van Cangh,et al.  Long-term results and late recurrence after endoureteropyelotomy: a critical analysis of prognostic factors. , 1994, The Journal of urology.

[10]  R. Clayman,et al.  Retrospective analysis of the effect of crossing vessels on successful retrograde endopyelotomy outcomes using spiral computerized tomography angiography. , 1998, The Journal of urology.

[11]  R. Clayman,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. , 1997, The Journal of urology.

[12]  L. Kavoussi,et al.  Comparison of open and endourologic approaches to the obstructed ureteropelvic junction. , 1995, Urology.

[13]  L. Persky,et al.  Initial complications and late results in dismembered pyeloplasty. , 1977, The Journal of urology.

[14]  L R Kavoussi,et al.  LAPAROSCOPIC PYELOPLASTY: Indications, Technique, and Long-Term Outcome , 1998 .

[15]  P. Cangh EDITORIAL: ENDOPYELOTOMY-A PANACEA FOR URETEROPELVIC JUNCTION OBSTRUCTION? , 1998 .

[16]  G. Badlani,et al.  Results of 212 consecutive endopyelotomies: an 8-year followup. , 1993, The Journal of urology.

[17]  G. Badlani,et al.  Complications of endopyelotomy: analysis in series of 64 patients. , 1988, The Journal of urology.

[18]  B. Tombal,et al.  Vessels around the ureteropelvic junction: significance and imaging by conventional radiology. , 1996, Journal of endourology.

[19]  A. Retik,et al.  Pediatric laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty. , 1995, The Journal of urology.

[20]  J. Beaugié,et al.  The long-term follow-up of Anderson-Hynes pyeloplasty for hydronephrosis. , 1973, British journal of urology.

[21]  F. Recker,et al.  Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty: preliminary report. , 1995, The Journal of urology.

[22]  R. Clayman,et al.  Acucise endopyelotomy: assessment of long-term durability. , 1996, The Journal of urology.

[23]  T. D. Richardson,et al.  Retrograde treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction using the ureteral cutting balloon catheter. , 1997, The Journal of urology.