Laparoscopic, transperitoneal pyeloplasty - own experience based on the first 20 cases
Article published in Urologia Polska 2003/56/2.
Tomasz Szydełko, Jarosław Kasprzak, Tadeusz Niezgoda, Romuald Zdrojowy, Janusz Dembowski, Anna Kołodziej, Wojciech Apoznański, Jerzy Lorenz
- Katedra i Klinika Urologii Akademii Medycznej we Wrocławiu
Kierownik kliniki: prof, dr hab. Jerzy Lorenz
kidney, hydronephrosis, laparoscopy, pyeloplasty
- Objective. The aim of the study was to describe the authors\' experience based on the first 20 cases treated by transperitoneal laparoscopy
- for UPJ obstruction. Material and methods. From November 2001 to January 2003, 20 trasperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplaslies for UPJ obstruction were
- performed. All of them were four- trocar procedures. The youngest patient was 16. the oldest was 5 7.9 dismembered pyeloplasties. 9 Y-
- V and 2 Fenger plasties were performed. The anastomosis was done intracorporcally, using 4-0 Maxon interrupted sutures. Follow-up
- studies included an IVP. ultrasound and Whitaker test (in 2 cases) 3-6 months postoperatively. Results. No significant postoperative complications were observed, hi 2 patients a rise of temperature to 38C was noted. One patient had
- prolonged urine leakage (10 days), which was treated conservatively. 14 patients underwent control IVP and ultrasound. All of them
- were pain free. In 12 cases less hydronephrosis, visible UPJ and/or normalization of drainage were observed. In 2 additional cases
- Whitaker test revealed low intnirenal pressure. Conclusions. The results of laparoscopic pyeloplasties compare with those achieved by open procedures with less morbidity and discomfort.
- 1. Notley RG. Beaugie JM: The long-term follow-up ofAnderson-IIy-nes pyeloplasty for hydronephrosis. Br J Uroi 1973: 45: 464.
- 2. Meretyk I. Meretyk S. dayman RV: Endopyelotomy: Comparison of ureteroscopic retrograde and antegrade percutaneous techniques. J Urol 1992: 148: 775.
- 3. Motola JA, Badlani GH. Smith AD: Results of 212 consecutive en-dopyelotomies: An 8-year follow-up. J Urol 1993; 149: 4.53.
- 4. Kavoussi LR, Peters CA: Laparoscopic pyeloplasty. J Urol 1993: 150:1891.
- 5. Schuessler WW. Grune MX Tecuanhuey LV, Preminger GM: Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty. J Urol 1993: 150: 1795.
- 6. Bauer JJ, BishofF JT. Moore RG, Chen RN, Iverson AJ, Kavoussi LR: Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty: assessment of objective and subjective outcome. J Urol 1999: 162: 692.
- 7. Eden CG. Cahill I), Allen JD: Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty: 50 consecutive cases. BJU International 2001; 88: 526.
- 8. Janetschek G. Pesthcl R, Franscher F: Laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Urol Clin N Am 2000: 27: 695.
- 9. Chen RN, Moore RG. Kavoussi LR: Laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Indications, technique and long-term outcome. Urol Clin N Ami 998: 25:323.
- 10. Janetschek G, Peschel R. Bartsch G: Laparoscopic Fenger plasty. J Endourol 2000, 14(10): 889.
- 11. Rassweiler JJ. Seemann 0, Frede T et ah Retroperitoneoscopy: Experience with 200 cases. J Urol 1998; 160: 1265.
- 12. Soulie M, Salomon I.. Patard JJ. Mouly P. Manunla A, Antiphon P, Lobel B, Abbou CC, Plante P: Extraperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty: a mullicenler study of 55 procedures. J Urol 2001: 166 (1): 48.
- 13. Moore RG. Averch \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'I\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'D, Schulam PG. Adams JB2nd, Chen RN. Kavoussi LR: Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: experience with iniliid 30 cases. J Urol 1997;157(2):459.
Tomasz Szydełko Klinika Urologii AM
pl. 1 Maja 8