Perioperative Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Conventional Laparoscopic Versus Laparoendoscopic Single-site Pyeloplasty

Chad R. Tracy, Jay D. Raman, Aditya Bagrodia, Jeffrey A Cadeddu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

106 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the outcomes of laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery with conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty (CLP) before LESS can be widely accepted. LESS surgery is a novel technique for performing laparoscopic pyeloplasty through a single incision. Methods: Fourteen patients undergoing less pyeloplasty were matched 2:1 with regard to age and side of surgery to a previous cohort of 28 patients who underwent CLP. All patients underwent surgery for symptomatic ureteropelvic junction obstruction and/or delayed urinary excretion based on functional imaging. Intracorporeal suturing was aided through a 5-mm instrument placed in the eventual drain site. Results: No difference was observed between the LESS and CLP cohorts in regard to preoperative characteristics. Postoperatively, no difference was noted between LESS and CLP cases in regard to length of stay (77 vs 74 hours; P = .69), morphine equivalents required (34 vs 38; P = .93), minor postoperative complications (14.3% vs 14.3%; P = 1.0), or major postoperative complications (21.4% vs 10%; P = .18). Median operative times (207 vs 237.5 minutes; P <.001) and median estimated blood loss (30 vs 72.5 mL; P = .002) were lower in patients undergoing LESS. Detailed follow-up imaging revealed a success rate of 96% for CLP at 14.6 months (86% follow-up) and 100% for LESS at 6.8 months (71% follow-up). Conclusions: Although LESS pyeloplasty is feasible, all measured perioperative outcomes are similar to CLP. Further studies are needed to better define the appropriate role of LESS surgery in urology.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1029-1034
Number of pages6
JournalUrology
Volume74
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2009

Fingerprint

Urology
Operative Time
Morphine
Length of Stay

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Perioperative Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Conventional Laparoscopic Versus Laparoendoscopic Single-site Pyeloplasty. / Tracy, Chad R.; Raman, Jay D.; Bagrodia, Aditya; Cadeddu, Jeffrey A.

In: Urology, Vol. 74, No. 5, 11.2009, p. 1029-1034.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{35f8683b4d314ae48ea25b86a48ff162,
title = "Perioperative Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Conventional Laparoscopic Versus Laparoendoscopic Single-site Pyeloplasty",
abstract = "Objectives: To compare the outcomes of laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery with conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty (CLP) before LESS can be widely accepted. LESS surgery is a novel technique for performing laparoscopic pyeloplasty through a single incision. Methods: Fourteen patients undergoing less pyeloplasty were matched 2:1 with regard to age and side of surgery to a previous cohort of 28 patients who underwent CLP. All patients underwent surgery for symptomatic ureteropelvic junction obstruction and/or delayed urinary excretion based on functional imaging. Intracorporeal suturing was aided through a 5-mm instrument placed in the eventual drain site. Results: No difference was observed between the LESS and CLP cohorts in regard to preoperative characteristics. Postoperatively, no difference was noted between LESS and CLP cases in regard to length of stay (77 vs 74 hours; P = .69), morphine equivalents required (34 vs 38; P = .93), minor postoperative complications (14.3{\%} vs 14.3{\%}; P = 1.0), or major postoperative complications (21.4{\%} vs 10{\%}; P = .18). Median operative times (207 vs 237.5 minutes; P <.001) and median estimated blood loss (30 vs 72.5 mL; P = .002) were lower in patients undergoing LESS. Detailed follow-up imaging revealed a success rate of 96{\%} for CLP at 14.6 months (86{\%} follow-up) and 100{\%} for LESS at 6.8 months (71{\%} follow-up). Conclusions: Although LESS pyeloplasty is feasible, all measured perioperative outcomes are similar to CLP. Further studies are needed to better define the appropriate role of LESS surgery in urology.",
author = "Tracy, {Chad R.} and Raman, {Jay D.} and Aditya Bagrodia and Cadeddu, {Jeffrey A}",
year = "2009",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1016/j.urology.2009.04.089",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "74",
pages = "1029--1034",
journal = "Urology",
issn = "0090-4295",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Perioperative Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Conventional Laparoscopic Versus Laparoendoscopic Single-site Pyeloplasty

AU - Tracy, Chad R.

AU - Raman, Jay D.

AU - Bagrodia, Aditya

AU - Cadeddu, Jeffrey A

PY - 2009/11

Y1 - 2009/11

N2 - Objectives: To compare the outcomes of laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery with conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty (CLP) before LESS can be widely accepted. LESS surgery is a novel technique for performing laparoscopic pyeloplasty through a single incision. Methods: Fourteen patients undergoing less pyeloplasty were matched 2:1 with regard to age and side of surgery to a previous cohort of 28 patients who underwent CLP. All patients underwent surgery for symptomatic ureteropelvic junction obstruction and/or delayed urinary excretion based on functional imaging. Intracorporeal suturing was aided through a 5-mm instrument placed in the eventual drain site. Results: No difference was observed between the LESS and CLP cohorts in regard to preoperative characteristics. Postoperatively, no difference was noted between LESS and CLP cases in regard to length of stay (77 vs 74 hours; P = .69), morphine equivalents required (34 vs 38; P = .93), minor postoperative complications (14.3% vs 14.3%; P = 1.0), or major postoperative complications (21.4% vs 10%; P = .18). Median operative times (207 vs 237.5 minutes; P <.001) and median estimated blood loss (30 vs 72.5 mL; P = .002) were lower in patients undergoing LESS. Detailed follow-up imaging revealed a success rate of 96% for CLP at 14.6 months (86% follow-up) and 100% for LESS at 6.8 months (71% follow-up). Conclusions: Although LESS pyeloplasty is feasible, all measured perioperative outcomes are similar to CLP. Further studies are needed to better define the appropriate role of LESS surgery in urology.

AB - Objectives: To compare the outcomes of laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery with conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty (CLP) before LESS can be widely accepted. LESS surgery is a novel technique for performing laparoscopic pyeloplasty through a single incision. Methods: Fourteen patients undergoing less pyeloplasty were matched 2:1 with regard to age and side of surgery to a previous cohort of 28 patients who underwent CLP. All patients underwent surgery for symptomatic ureteropelvic junction obstruction and/or delayed urinary excretion based on functional imaging. Intracorporeal suturing was aided through a 5-mm instrument placed in the eventual drain site. Results: No difference was observed between the LESS and CLP cohorts in regard to preoperative characteristics. Postoperatively, no difference was noted between LESS and CLP cases in regard to length of stay (77 vs 74 hours; P = .69), morphine equivalents required (34 vs 38; P = .93), minor postoperative complications (14.3% vs 14.3%; P = 1.0), or major postoperative complications (21.4% vs 10%; P = .18). Median operative times (207 vs 237.5 minutes; P <.001) and median estimated blood loss (30 vs 72.5 mL; P = .002) were lower in patients undergoing LESS. Detailed follow-up imaging revealed a success rate of 96% for CLP at 14.6 months (86% follow-up) and 100% for LESS at 6.8 months (71% follow-up). Conclusions: Although LESS pyeloplasty is feasible, all measured perioperative outcomes are similar to CLP. Further studies are needed to better define the appropriate role of LESS surgery in urology.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70350565395&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70350565395&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.urology.2009.04.089

DO - 10.1016/j.urology.2009.04.089

M3 - Article

C2 - 19660793

AN - SCOPUS:70350565395

VL - 74

SP - 1029

EP - 1034

JO - Urology

JF - Urology

SN - 0090-4295

IS - 5

ER -