Journals / Türk Üroloji Dergisi/Turkish Journal of Urology / 2010 / Cilt: 36 - Sayı: 3

Pediatrik laparoskopik dismember piyeloplasti: Teknik ve 25 hastanın sonuçları

Pediatric laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty: Technique and results in 25 patients

Pages
233–237
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: LDP, if performed by expert surgeons in high-volume centers, presents results that are comparable with open surgery, with lower surgical trauma for the patients.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: To evaluate the postoperative and functional results of the laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty (LDP).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and methods: Between January 2007 and Augst 2009, we performed 25 LDP in our clinic.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: LDP, if performed by expert surgeons in high-volume centers, presents results that are comparable with open surgery, with lower surgical trauma for the patients.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2007 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the postoperative and functional results of the laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty (LDP). Materials and methods: Between January 2007 and Augst 2009, we performed 25 LDP in our clinic. All patients presented with an ureteropelvic junction obstruction and dilatation of renal calyx system with an enlarged renal pelvis. Demographic data, perioperative and postoperative parameters, including operating time, estimated blood loss, complications, length of hospital stay, functional outcome were evaluated. Results: The mean operative time for LDP was 115 (range 65-230) min and the mean estimated blood loss was negligible in all patients. The mean hospital stay was 4.7 (range 3-11) days. No conversion to open surgery occurred. In the follow-up, we noted success in 92% of the patients. Conclusion: LDP, if performed by expert surgeons in high-volume centers, presents results that are comparable with open surgery, with lower surgical trauma for the patients.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı laparoskopik dismember piyeloplastinin (LDP) postoperatif ve fonksiyonel sonuçlarını değerlendirmektir. Gereç ve yöntem: Ocak 2007 ve Ağustos 2009 tarihleri arasında kliniğimizde 25 LDP gerçekleştirdik. Tüm hastalarda üreteropelvik bileşke obstrüksiyonu ve renal kaliks sistemin dilatasyonu ile irileşmiş renal pelvis mevcuttu. Demografik veriler; perioperatif parametreler; operasyon süresi, tahmini kan kaybı, komplikasyonlar, hastanede kalış süresi dahil olmak üzere postoperatif parametreler; ve fonksiyonel sonuç değerlendirildi. Bulgular: LDP için ortalama operasyon süresi 115 (dağılım 65-230) dk olup, ortalama tahmini kan kaybı tüm hastalarda göz ardı edilebilir düzeydeydi. Ortalama hastanede kalış süresi 4.7 (dağılım 3-11) gündü. Açık cerrahiye geçilmedi. İzlemde hastaların %92’sinde başarı kaydedildi. Sonuç: LDP, tecrübeli cerrahlar tarafından yüksek hasta kapasiteli merkezlerde yapıldığında, hastalar için daha az cerrahi travma ve açık cerrahi ile karşılaştırılabilir sonuçlar sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

SAVAŞ, M., YENİ, E., ÇİFTÇİ, H., ÖNCEL, H., ALTUNKOL, A., UTANGAÇ, M. (2010). Pediatrik laparoskopik dismember piyeloplasti: Teknik ve 25 hastanın sonuçları. Türk Üroloji Dergisi/Turkish Journal of Urology, Cilt: 36 - Sayı: 3, 233–237. https://ajindex.com/articles/328154

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. O’Reilly PH, Brooman PJ, Mak S, Jones M, Pickup C, Atkinson C, et al. The long-term results of Anderson-Hynes pyeloplasty. BJU Int 2001
  2. PMID: 11251517 2. Rassweiler J, Subotic S, Feist-Schwenk M, Sugiono M, Schulze M, Teber D, et al. Minimally invasive treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction: longterm experience with an algorithm for laser endopyelotomy and laparoscopic retroperitoneal pyeloplasty. J Urol 2007
  3. PMID: 17296396 3. Yeung CK, Tam YH, Sihoe JD, Lee KH, Liu KW. Retroperitoneoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty for pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction in infants and children. BJU Int 2001
  4. PMID: 11298045 4. Reddy M, Nerli RB, Bashetty R, Ravish IR. Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty in children. J Urol 2005
  5. PMID: 16006953 5. Cascio S, Tien A, Chee W, Tan HL. Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty in children younger than 2 years. J Urol 2007
  6. PMID: 17162086, 6. Türk IA, Davis JW, Winkelmann B. Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty: the method of choice in the presence of an enlarged renal pelvis and crossing vessels. Eur Urol 2002
  7. PMID: 12234512 7. Rassweiler J, Teber D, Frede T. Complications of laparoscopic pyeloplasty. World J Urol 2008
  8. PMID: 18470516 8. Kaouk JH, Gill IS. Laparoscopic reconstructive urology. J Urol 2003
  9. PMID: 14501695 9. Peters CA, Schlussel RN, Retik AB. Pediatric laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty. J Urol 1995
  10. PMID: 7752371 10. Tan HL. Laparoscopic Anderson–Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty in children. J Urol 1999
  11. PMID: 10458429 11. Bonnard A, Fouquet V, Carricaburu E, Aigrain Y, El-Ghoneimi A. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty in children. J Urol 2005
  12. PMID: 15821565 12. Lee A, Lee KC, Oh SJ, Park MS, Choi H. Laparoscopically-assisted pyeloplasty: a new technique. BJU Int 2001
  13. Nassar A. Laparoscopic mobilization and exteriorization for minimally invasive small bowel resection. Br J Surg 1993
  14. PMID: 8242327 14. El-Ghoneimi A, Farhat W, Bolduc S, Bagli C, McLorie G, Aigrain Y, et al. Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty by a retroperitoneal approach in children. BJU Int 2003
  15. PMID: 12823392 15. Wagner S, Greco F, Inferrera A, Hoda MR, Kawan F, Hamza A, et al. Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty: technique and results in 105 patients. World J Urol 2009 Oct 22. [Epub ahead of print] PMID: 19847438 16. Eden CG. Minimally invasive treatment for ureteropelvi