Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty with and without a ureteral stent

Amanjot S. Sethi, Stanton M. Regan, Chandru Sundaram

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) has been shown to be an efficacious treatment for ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Although the use of a ureteral stent is commonplace, the water-tight anastomosis possible with robotic assistance may obviate its need. We report a feasibility study of unstented RALPs and present our experience with both the stented (SRP) and unstented (URP) approach. Materials and Methods: A retrospective review of RALPs completed at our institution from 2003 to 2008 was performed. Thirty-five patients had postoperative stents. Seventeen RALPs were completed without ureteral stents. Narcotic requirements, operative time, estimated blood loss, daily drain output, length of stay, and complications were examined. Results: Fifty-two patients underwent RALP without conversion to open procedure (35 SRP, 17 URP). Operative time was significantly less in the URP group (p=0.01). URPs required less narcotics and had shorter length of stay. Three complications were reported after SRP, whereas two patients with URP experienced transient ureteral obstruction, which resolved after 4 weeks with an indwelling ureteral stent. Postoperative renograms showed improved drainage in all but four patients (two SRPs and two URPs), each of whom had subjective improvement in symptoms postoperatively. Conclusions: Our data suggest that URP is a safe and feasible procedure for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. There were no clinically significant differences between the stented and unstented groups. Further prospective evaluation is needed; however, URP can be performed by an experienced surgeon in a carefully selected patient.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)239-243
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Endourology
Volume25
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2011

Fingerprint

Stents
Narcotics
Operative Time
Length of Stay
Conversion to Open Surgery
Ureteral Obstruction
Feasibility Studies
Robotics
Drainage
Water
Therapeutics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty with and without a ureteral stent. / Sethi, Amanjot S.; Regan, Stanton M.; Sundaram, Chandru.

In: Journal of Endourology, Vol. 25, No. 2, 01.02.2011, p. 239-243.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sethi, Amanjot S. ; Regan, Stanton M. ; Sundaram, Chandru. / Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty with and without a ureteral stent. In: Journal of Endourology. 2011 ; Vol. 25, No. 2. pp. 239-243.
@article{795ad88f5bf64811894ef09cc9432fa9,
title = "Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty with and without a ureteral stent",
abstract = "Objective: Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) has been shown to be an efficacious treatment for ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Although the use of a ureteral stent is commonplace, the water-tight anastomosis possible with robotic assistance may obviate its need. We report a feasibility study of unstented RALPs and present our experience with both the stented (SRP) and unstented (URP) approach. Materials and Methods: A retrospective review of RALPs completed at our institution from 2003 to 2008 was performed. Thirty-five patients had postoperative stents. Seventeen RALPs were completed without ureteral stents. Narcotic requirements, operative time, estimated blood loss, daily drain output, length of stay, and complications were examined. Results: Fifty-two patients underwent RALP without conversion to open procedure (35 SRP, 17 URP). Operative time was significantly less in the URP group (p=0.01). URPs required less narcotics and had shorter length of stay. Three complications were reported after SRP, whereas two patients with URP experienced transient ureteral obstruction, which resolved after 4 weeks with an indwelling ureteral stent. Postoperative renograms showed improved drainage in all but four patients (two SRPs and two URPs), each of whom had subjective improvement in symptoms postoperatively. Conclusions: Our data suggest that URP is a safe and feasible procedure for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. There were no clinically significant differences between the stented and unstented groups. Further prospective evaluation is needed; however, URP can be performed by an experienced surgeon in a carefully selected patient.",
author = "Sethi, {Amanjot S.} and Regan, {Stanton M.} and Chandru Sundaram",
year = "2011",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1089/end.2010.0192",
language = "English",
volume = "25",
pages = "239--243",
journal = "Journal of Endourology",
issn = "0892-7790",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty with and without a ureteral stent

AU - Sethi, Amanjot S.

AU - Regan, Stanton M.

AU - Sundaram, Chandru

PY - 2011/2/1

Y1 - 2011/2/1

N2 - Objective: Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) has been shown to be an efficacious treatment for ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Although the use of a ureteral stent is commonplace, the water-tight anastomosis possible with robotic assistance may obviate its need. We report a feasibility study of unstented RALPs and present our experience with both the stented (SRP) and unstented (URP) approach. Materials and Methods: A retrospective review of RALPs completed at our institution from 2003 to 2008 was performed. Thirty-five patients had postoperative stents. Seventeen RALPs were completed without ureteral stents. Narcotic requirements, operative time, estimated blood loss, daily drain output, length of stay, and complications were examined. Results: Fifty-two patients underwent RALP without conversion to open procedure (35 SRP, 17 URP). Operative time was significantly less in the URP group (p=0.01). URPs required less narcotics and had shorter length of stay. Three complications were reported after SRP, whereas two patients with URP experienced transient ureteral obstruction, which resolved after 4 weeks with an indwelling ureteral stent. Postoperative renograms showed improved drainage in all but four patients (two SRPs and two URPs), each of whom had subjective improvement in symptoms postoperatively. Conclusions: Our data suggest that URP is a safe and feasible procedure for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. There were no clinically significant differences between the stented and unstented groups. Further prospective evaluation is needed; however, URP can be performed by an experienced surgeon in a carefully selected patient.

AB - Objective: Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) has been shown to be an efficacious treatment for ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Although the use of a ureteral stent is commonplace, the water-tight anastomosis possible with robotic assistance may obviate its need. We report a feasibility study of unstented RALPs and present our experience with both the stented (SRP) and unstented (URP) approach. Materials and Methods: A retrospective review of RALPs completed at our institution from 2003 to 2008 was performed. Thirty-five patients had postoperative stents. Seventeen RALPs were completed without ureteral stents. Narcotic requirements, operative time, estimated blood loss, daily drain output, length of stay, and complications were examined. Results: Fifty-two patients underwent RALP without conversion to open procedure (35 SRP, 17 URP). Operative time was significantly less in the URP group (p=0.01). URPs required less narcotics and had shorter length of stay. Three complications were reported after SRP, whereas two patients with URP experienced transient ureteral obstruction, which resolved after 4 weeks with an indwelling ureteral stent. Postoperative renograms showed improved drainage in all but four patients (two SRPs and two URPs), each of whom had subjective improvement in symptoms postoperatively. Conclusions: Our data suggest that URP is a safe and feasible procedure for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. There were no clinically significant differences between the stented and unstented groups. Further prospective evaluation is needed; however, URP can be performed by an experienced surgeon in a carefully selected patient.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79952292257&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79952292257&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/end.2010.0192

DO - 10.1089/end.2010.0192

M3 - Article

C2 - 21254922

AN - SCOPUS:79952292257

VL - 25

SP - 239

EP - 243

JO - Journal of Endourology

JF - Journal of Endourology

SN - 0892-7790

IS - 2

ER -