PTU - Polskie Towarzystwo Urologiczne
list of articles:

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. 1. Notley RG. Beaugie JM: The long-term follow-up ofAnderson-IIy-nes pyeloplasty for hydronephrosis. Br J Uroi 1973: 45: 464.
  2. 2. Meretyk I. Meretyk S. dayman RV: Endopyelotomy: Comparison of ureteroscopic retrograde and antegrade percutaneous techniques. J Urol 1992: 148: 775.
  3. 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. 4. Kavoussi LR, Peters CA: Laparoscopic pyeloplasty. J Urol 1993: 150:1891.
  5. 5. Schuessler WW. Grune MX Tecuanhuey LV, Preminger GM: Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty. J Urol 1993: 150: 1795.
  6. 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. 7. Eden CG. Cahill I), Allen JD: Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty: 50 consecutive cases. BJU International 2001; 88: 526.
  8. 8. Janetschek G. Pesthcl R, Franscher F: Laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Urol Clin N Am 2000: 27: 695.
  9. 9. Chen RN, Moore RG. Kavoussi LR: Laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Indications, technique and long-term outcome. Urol Clin N Ami 998: 25:323.
  10. 10. Janetschek G, Peschel R. Bartsch G: Laparoscopic Fenger plasty. J Endourol 2000, 14(10): 889.
  11. 11. Rassweiler JJ. Seemann 0, Frede T et ah Retroperitoneoscopy: Experience with 200 cases. J Urol 1998; 160: 1265.
  12. 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. 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
50-043 Wroclaw