Laparoendoscopic single‐site versus conventional transperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty: A prospective randomized study. (26th February 2013)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Tugcu, Volkan; Ilbey, Yusuf Ozlem; Sonmezay, Erkan; Aras, Bekir; Tasci, Ali Ihsan
• Is Part Of: International journal of urology. Volume 20:Number 11(2013)
• Page Start: 1112
• Page End: 1117
• Publication Date: 2013-02-26
• Subjects: laparascopy -- pyeloplasty -- single port -- single‐site surgery; Urology -- Periodicals; Genitourinary organs -- Periodicals; Urologic Diseases -- Periodicals; 616.6005
• DOI: 10.1111/iju.12126
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0919-8172

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: To evaluate the potential benefits of laparoendoscopic single‐site pyeloplasty over conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Methods: Between October 2009 and January 2012, 39 patients were enrolled in a prospective study and randomized to undergo a laparoendoscopic single‐site pyeloplasty ( n = 19) or conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty ( n = 20). The outcomes in the two groups were compared by using Mann‐Whitney U ‐test and χ 2 ‐test, and considering a P ‐value less than 0.05 as statistically significant. Results: There was no difference in blood loss (55.67 ± 6.71 vs 45.84 ± 5.22 mL, P = 0.60), transfusion rates (0% for both) and hospitalization time (2.12 ± 0.23 vs 2.06 ± 0.34 days, P = 0.72) between the laparoendoscopic single‐site pyeloplasty and conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty groups. The time to return to normal activities was shorter (8.65 ± 1.25 vs 11.53 ± 1.28 days, P = 0.01), and median operative time (195.21 ± 12.15 vs 145.62 ± 15.34 min, P = 0.001) was longer in the laparoendoscopic single‐site pyeloplasty group compared with the conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty group. No significant intraoperative or postoperative complications occurred in either group. Compared with conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty, laparoendoscopic single‐site pyeloplasty yielded better cosmetic results and patient satisfaction. The mean follow‐up period was 19.7 months (4–28 months). The success rate was 95% in both the groups. Both the visual analog scale and the postoperative use of analgesics were significantly lower in patients who underwent laparoendoscopic single‐site pyeloplasty. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that laparoendoscopic single‐site pyeloplasty can offer faster recovery and higher patient satisfaction than conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Thus, this novel technique promises to become the treatment of choice in minimally‐invasive management of ureteropelvic junction obstruction.