Journal of Minimal Access Surgery

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2008  |  Volume : 4  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 76--79

Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty: Comparison of two surgical approaches- a single centre experience of three years

Punit Bansal, Aman Gupta, Ritesh Mongha, Srinivas Narayan, AK Kundu, SC Chakraborty, RK Das, MK Bera 
 Department of Urology, Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education and Research, Kolkata, India

Correspondence Address:
Punit Bansal
Department of Urology, Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education and Research, 242 AJC Bose Road, Kolkata- 700 020
India

Abstract

Background: Ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) causes hydronephrosis and progressive renal impairment may ensue if left uncorrected. Open pyeloplasty remains the standard against which new technique must be compared. We compared laparoscopic (LP) and open pyeloplasty (OP) in a randomized prospective trial. Materials and Methods: A prospective randomized study was done from January 2004 to January 2007 in which a total of 28 laparoscopic and 34 open pyeloplasty were done. All laparoscopic pyeloplasties were performed transperitoneally. Standard open Anderson Hynes pyeloplasty, spiral flap or VY plasty was done depending on anatomic consideration. Patients were followed with DTPA scan at three months and IVP at six months. Perioperative parameters including operative time, analgesic use, hospital stay, and complication and success rates were compared. Results: Mean total operative time with stent placement in LP group was 244.2 min (188-300 min) compared to 122 min (100-140 min) in OP group. Compared to OP group, the post operative diclofenac requirement was significantly less in LP group (mean 107.14 mg) and OP group required mean of (682.35 mg). The duration of analgesic requirement was also significantly less in LP group. The postoperative hospital stay in LP was mean 3.14 Days (2-7 days) significantly less than the open group mean of 8.29 days (7-11 days). Conclusion: LP has a minimal level of morbidity and short hospital stay compared to open approach. Although, laparoscopic pyeloplasty has the disadvantages of longer operative time and requires significant skill of intracorporeal knotting but it is here to stay and represents an emerging standard of care.



How to cite this article:
Bansal P, Gupta A, Mongha R, Narayan S, Kundu A K, Chakraborty S C, Das R K, Bera M K. Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty: Comparison of two surgical approaches- a single centre experience of three years.J Min Access Surg 2008;4:76-79


How to cite this URL:
Bansal P, Gupta A, Mongha R, Narayan S, Kundu A K, Chakraborty S C, Das R K, Bera M K. Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty: Comparison of two surgical approaches- a single centre experience of three years. J Min Access Surg [serial online] 2008 [cited 2021 Jun 19 ];4:76-79
Available from: https://www.journalofmas.com/text.asp?2008/4/3/76/43091


Full Text

The article found to be Plagiarized and hence been Retracted.