Minimally invasive open pyeloplasty in children: Long-term follow-up

2Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Objective: Our aim was to report the long-term follow-up for minimally invasive open pyeloplasty in chil-dren. Material and methods: A total of 213 children with a mean age 16.33 months underwent miniature open pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction between January 2010 and May 2016. Anderson–Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty was performed through a subcostal miniature incision. The intraoperative and postoperative parameters including surgical operative time, incision size, intraoperative blood loss volume, postoperative analgesic use, hospital stay, complications, and success rate were documented. Results: The mean surgery time was 65 min (50–85 min), and incision size was 16.99 mm (12–36 mm). None of the patients required blood transfusion or narcotic analgesics in the postoperative period. The mean hospital stay was 21.97 h (10–48 h). Minor side effects included urinary tract infection (3.8%) and urinary leakage in one case (0.004%). Major complications were not observed. The mean antero-posterior pelvic diameter before and after surgery was 28.69 ± 11.54 mm and 15.89 ± 9.29 mm, respectively with a mean dif-ference of 12.78 mm, which shows a significant decrease (P value = 0.001). The success rate was 98.1% with a mean follow-up of 21.43 months (3–56 months). Two of the recurrences occurred in the first postoperative year, another one after 1.5 years, and the last one after 4 years. Conclusion: Our study confirms minimally invasive open pyeloplasty in children as a safe and efficient procedure with the least complication and hospital stay rate in comparison with other minimally invasive techniques. Moreover, long-term follow-up is a requirement in pyeloplasty surgery.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Alizadeh, F., Haghdani, S., & Seydmohammadi, B. (2020). Minimally invasive open pyeloplasty in children: Long-term follow-up. Turkish Journal of Urology, 46(5), 393–397. https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2020.20011

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free