Is open pyeloplasty still a practical option for pediatric patients in resource-limited settings compared to laparoscopic and robotic approaches?

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.
Log in to save this article

Abstract

Purpose: To compare open pyeloplasty (OP) to laparoscopic (LP) and robotic pyeloplasty (RP) for pelviureteric junction obstruction in children in the subcontinent. Methods : A total of 168 patients (56 each) were randomized to receive OP, LP, or RP, respectively. Results : The operative time for the RP was significantly higher (P<0.001) compared to LP and open OP. The length of stay (LOS) for RP and LP was substantially lower (P<0.001) compared to the OP, with average stays of 2.8±1.5 days, 3.1±1.2 days, and 6.4±8.1 days, respectively. In the RP group, 53 participants (98.1%) exhibited non-obstructed drainage patterns post-operatively, compared to 52 (92.8%) in the LP group and 50 (89.3%) in the OP group (P=0.363). Only, 1(1.8%) patient in RP, 2(3.6%) in LP and 3(5.3%) in OP group exhibited obstructed drainage on dynamic nuclear scan. Grade II complications occurred in 7 patients in the RP cohort, 9 patients in LP and in 10 patients in the OP cohort. Higher-grade complications (Clavien Grade 3 and 4) were significantly more common in the OP group (9.0% vs 2% and 4%), P<0.001). Conclusion : OP demonstrates a similar success rate to LP and RP, establishing it as a viable surgical alternative for managing PUJO in paediatric patients.

Article activity feed