Comparison of the operation time and complications between conventional and robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty

• Published in: Actas urologicas españolas Vol. 35; no. 9; pp. 523 - 528
• Main Authors: García-Galisteo, E, Emmanuel-Tejero, E, Navarro Vílchez, P, García-Galisteo, J, Baena-González, V
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English; Spanish
• Published: Spain Elsevier España 01.10.2011
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adult; Complicaciones; Complications; Estenosis unión pieloureteral; Female; Humans; Kidney Pelvis - surgery; Laparoscopic pyeloplasty; Laparoscopy - adverse effects; Laparoscopy - methods; Male; Middle Aged; Nephrectomy - adverse effects; Nephrectomy - methods; Operation times; Pieloplastia laparoscópica; Pieloplastia robótica; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology; Pyeloureteral junction stenosis; Retrospective Studies; Robotic-assisted pyeloplasty; Robotics; Surgical treatment; Tiempos operatorios; Time Factors; Tratamiento quirúrgico; Urology; Young Adult; Pyeloureteral junction stenosis; Tratamiento quirúrgico; Pieloplastia laparoscópica; Robotic-assisted pyeloplasty; Surgical treatment; Complications; Operation times; Tiempos operatorios; Pieloplastia robótica; Complicaciones; Estenosis unión pieloureteral; Laparoscopic pyeloplasty
• ISSN: 2173-5786; 2173-5786; 1699-7980
• DOI: 10.1016/j.acuroe.2011.12.006

Abstract Objective To compare the different times into which the convention and robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty can be divided. To compare the rate of complications between both procedures. Material and methods A retrospective study was performed of the patients diagnosed with pyeloureteral junction stenosis and treated with convention and robotic laparoscopic pyeloplasty with more than one year of follow-up. All of the interventions were recorded and visualized. The different times in which the pyeloplasty can be divided were measured. All of the peri- and post-operative complications that occurred in the patients were collected. The non-parametric tests of Kolmogorov–Smirnov and Mann–Whitney U -test for independent samples were applied using a significance level of 0.05. Results A total of 50 patients were validated. Thirty three were treated with convention laparoscopy and, 17 with robotic laparoscopy. The suture time, total intervention time and time of hospital stay were lower with a statistically significant difference in the robotic-assisted pyeloplasty. The robotic pyeloplasty had a lower percentage of complications (76.5% vs. 48.5%). The most frequent complications were urinary infections, in relation to the double J. Two restenoses occurred in the conventional laparoscopy and one in the robotic-assisted. The success rate was 93.9% for the conventional laparoscopy and 94.1% for the robotic-assisted one. Conclusions Although the success rate is similar in both procedures, the robotic pyeloplasty is a very fast procedure and has lower rates of complications than the conventional laparoscopy.