Transition from open to robotic-assisted pediatric pyeloplasty: A feasibility and outcome study

Sean T. O'Brien, Aseem R. Shukla

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

40 Scopus citations

Abstract

Purpose: Laparoscopic reconstructive procedures in the pediatric patient are associated with a steep learning curve. Outcomes from robotic-assisted pediatric urology have been reported by surgeons with known facility in laparoscopic surgery. We describe the experience of a single surgeon in transitioning from open to robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) without previous training in traditional laparoscopic pyeloplasty or intracorporeal suturing. Materials and Methods: We reviewed our experience with 20 (mean age 7.4 years) consecutive children undergoing RALP for ureteropelvic junction obstruction at our institution over 36 months. Additionally, a literature search was conducted to identify age-similar patient groups who underwent open and laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Results: Length of hospitalization and postoperative analgesia requirement were greater in the age-similar open pyeloplasty group compared to the other two groups. Intraoperative times were greater in the laparoscopic and RALP groups compared to the open pyeloplasty group. Conclusions: Our experience confirms the feasibility of transitioning from open to robotic-assisted laparoscopic pediatric pyeloplasty without previous experience in conventional laparoscopy. Outcomes, analgesic requirement and hospitalization for the patients from our institution are comparable to the laparoscopy patient group and improved compared to open pyeloplasty patients from the literature.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)276-281
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Pediatric Urology
Volume8
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2012

Keywords

  • Child
  • Humans
  • Hydronephrosis
  • Kidney pelvis
  • Robotics

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Transition from open to robotic-assisted pediatric pyeloplasty: A feasibility and outcome study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this