Journals / Türk Üroloji Dergisi/Turkish Journal of Urology / 2006 / Cilt: 32 - Sayı: 2

Retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children

Çocuklarda retroperitoneal laparoskopik piyeloplasti

Pages
208–212
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: Retroperitoneoscopic pyeloplasty could be preferred for suitable cases in pediatric age group, however this technique needs experience.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:ntroduction: It was aimed to evaluation of our results in retroperitoneoscopic pyeloplasty for the treatment of ureteropelvic obstruction.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The operations were performed through three 10 mm laporoscopic trocars.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Retroperitoneoscopic pyeloplasty could be preferred for suitable cases in pediatric age group, however this technique needs experience.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Çocuk · Laparoskopi · Üreter tıkanması

Abstract

ntroduction: It was aimed to evaluation of our results in retroperitoneoscopic pyeloplasty for the treatment of ureteropelvic obstruction. Materials and Methods: In flank position, retroperitoneal space was dissected with a balloon. The operations were performed through three 10 mm laporoscopic trocars. After the placement of a Double J stent, the anostomosis was sutured in cases with dismembered pyeloplasty. A drain was left in surgical field. The cases were followed with a three months period. Results: There were four male and one female patient, whose median age was 11 (min-max: 6-17) years. The operation time was a median 180 (min-max: 130-195) minutes. Dismembered pyeloplasty were performed in four cases and Fenger technique was performed in one case. Aberrant vessel was detected in one Dismembered Pyeloplasty case. The hospital stay time was a median 7 (5-7) days. Urinary leakage lasted for 10 days in Fenger pyeloplasty case. The following time was a median 4.5 (min-max: 3-7) months and renal units were normal in this period. Conclusion: Retroperitoneoscopic pyeloplasty could be preferred for suitable cases in pediatric age group, however this technique needs experience.

Özet

Üreteropelvik bileşke obstrüksiyonu tedavisinde uyguladığımız retroperitoneoskopik piyeloplasti sonuçlarının değerlendirilmesi amaçlandı. Üreteropelvik bileşke darlığı tanısı almış olan olgulara flank pozisyonu verilerek retroperitoneal alan bir balonla diseke edildi. Üç adet 10 mm'lik trokar girişi kullanılarak ameliyatlar yapıldı. Dismembered piyeloplasti yapılan olgularda anastomoz hattı, bir çift J kateter yerleşiminin ardından dikildi. Loja bir adet dren kondu. Olgular ameliyat sonrası üç aylık aralıklarla takip edildi. Ortanca yaşı 11 (min-max: 6-17) yıl olan, dördü erkek, biri kız olmak üzere beş olguya ameliyat yapıldı. Ortanca ameliyat süresi 180 (min-max: 130-195) dakika idi. Olguların dördüne dismembered piyeloplasti, birine Fenger tekniği uygulandı. Dismembered teknik uygulanan bir olguda aberran damar basısı mevcut idi. Hastanede kalış süresi ortanca 7 (min-max: 5-7) gün idi. Fenger piyeloplasti yapılan olguda ıslatma süresi 10 gün idi. Ortanca takip süresi 4.5 (min-max: 3-7) ay olup, bu sürede böbrek hastalarında soruna rastlanmadı. Retroperitoneoskopik piyeloplasti üreteropelvik bileşke darlığı olan uygun olgularda tercih edilebilecek, uygulanması deneyim gerektiren bir tekniktir.

🔖

Cite This Article

DEMİRCİ, D., BOZER, F., GÜRGÖZE, M. K., SOFİKERİM, M., GÜLMEZ, İ., KARACAGİL, M. (2006). Retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children. Türk Üroloji Dergisi/Turkish Journal of Urology, Cilt: 32 - Sayı: 2, 208–212. https://ajindex.com/articles/328313

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Schuessler WW, Grune MT, Tecuanhuey LV, et al: Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty. J Urol. 150: 1795-9, 1993
  2. Janetschek G, Peschel R, Altarac S, etal: Laparoscopic and retroperitoneoscopic repair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Urology. 47: 311-316, 1996
  3. Yeung CK, Tam YH, Sıhoe KH, et al: Retroperitoneos-copic dismembered pyeloplasty for pelvi-ureteric juncti-on obstruction in infants and childern. BJU International. 87: 509-513, 2001
  4. Gülmez İ, Demirci D, Sözüer EM, et al: Retroperitone-al laparoskopik üreterolitotomi: Kliniğimizdeki ilk uygu-lamalarımız. Türk Üroloji Dergisi. 22: 272-277, 1996
  5. Knudsen BE, Cook AJ, Watterson JD, et al: Percuta-neous antegrade endopyelotomy: Long term results from one institution. Urology. 63: 230-234, 2004
  6. Schenkman EM, Tarry WF: Comparison of percutane-ous endopyelotomy with open pyeloplasty for pediatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J Urol. 159: 1013-15, 1998
  7. Moore RG, Averch TD, Schulam PG, et al: Laparosco-pic pyeloplasty: Experience with the initial 30 cases. J Urol. 157: 459-462, 1997
  8. Demirci D, Gülmez İ, Ekmekçioğlu O, et al: Retrope-ritoneoskopik nefrektomi ve nefroüreterektomi: Ön rapor. Türk Üroloji Dergisi. 26: 357-360, 2000
  9. Demirci D, Gülmez İ, Ekmekçioğlu O, et al: Retrope-ritoneoscopic Ureterelithotomy for the treatment of Ure-teral calculi. Urol Int. 73: 234-237, 2004
  10. Bonnard A, Fouquet V, Carricaburu E, et al: Retrope-ritoneal laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty in childern. J Urol. 173: 1710-1713, 2005
  11. Mandhani A, Kumar D, Kumar A, et al: Steps to redu-ce operative time in laparoscopic dismembered pyelo-plasty for moderate to large renal pelvis. Urology. 66: 981-984, 2005.