Abstract
Robotic-assisted procedures are gaining traction as a viable form of minimally invasive surgery in the field of reconstructive surgery. In this article, the aim is to present our initial experience and clinical outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RAL-P). We performed RAL-P in 22 patients for the management of ureteropelvic junction obstruction between December 2012 and August 2015. The da Vinci® S surgical system was utilized for all cases. All procedures were performed via a transperitoneal approach. We assessed perioperative outcomes, and furthermore, compared between pediatric and adult patients undergoing this procedure. Dismembered procedures were performed in 19 patients. Three patients underwent Y-V plasty, and two patients who experienced failure during the primary pyeloplasty had to undergo reoperation. Although the console time for pediatric patients was significantly shorter than that of adults (123.1 ± 18.3, 162.4 ± 23.9 min, respectively, p < 0.001), success rate was not significantly different between pediatric and adults (100 vs 90 %, p = 0.512). According to a comparison of surgical outcomes by age, the console time was significantly shorter in pediatric than in adult patients. This finding may be attributable to the differences in intraabdominal fatty tissues. Besides, RAL-P with Y–V plasty was applicable even for cases of failed pyeloplasty. In conclusion, the surgical outcomes of RAL-P were favorable and safe for both pediatric and adult patients, and comparable to findings of previous reports. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a case series of RAL-P in Japan.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Sukumar S, Bhandari M, Menon M (2012) The evolution of robotic surgery and its clinical applications. In: Gundeti MS (ed) Pediatric robotic and reconstructive urology: a comprehensive guide. Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Chichester, pp 3–9
Trevisani LF, Nguyen HT (2013) Current controversies in pediatric urologic robotic surgery. Curr Opin Urol 23(1):72–77. doi:10.1097/MOU.0b013e32835b0ad2
Persky L, Krause JR, Boltuch RL (1977) Initial complications and late results in dismembered pyeloplasty. J Urol 118(1 Pt 2):162–165
Kavoussi LR, Peters CA (1993) Laparoscopic pyeloplasty. J Urol 150(6):1891–1894
Schuessler WW, Grune MT, Tecuanhuey LV, Preminger GM (1993) Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty. J Urol 150(6):1795–1799
Peters CA, Schlussel RN, Retik AB (1995) Pediatric laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty. J Urol 153(6):1962–1965
Piaggio LA, Franc-Guimond J, Noh PH et al (2007) Transperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty for primary repair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction in infants and children: comparison with open surgery. J Urol 178(4 Pt 2):1579–1583. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2007.03.159
Gettman MT, Peschel R, Neururer R, Bartsch G (2002) A comparison of laparoscopic pyeloplasty performed with the daVinci robotic system versus standard laparoscopic techniques: initial clinical results. Eur Urol 42(5):453–457 (discussion 457–458)
Yoshida M, Furukawa T, Morikawa Y, Kitagawa Y, Kitajima M (2010) The developments and achievements of endoscopic surgery, robotic surgery and function-preserving surgery. Jpn J Clin Oncol 40(9):863–869. doi:10.1093/jjco/hyq138
Orvieto MA, Large M, Gundeti MS (2012) Robotic paediatric urology. BJU Int 110(1):2–13. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10877.x
Lucas SM, Sundaram CP, Wolf JS Jr et al (2012) Factors that impact the outcome of minimally invasive pyeloplasty: results of the Multi-institutional Laparoscopic and Robotic Pyeloplasty Collaborative Group. J Urol 187(2):522–527. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2011.09.158
Dangle PP, Kearns J, Anderson B, Gundeti MS (2013) Outcomes of infants undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty compared to open repair. J Urol. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2013.07.063
Kojima Y, Umemoto Y, Mizuno K et al (2011) Comparison of laparoscopic pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in adults and children: lessons learned. J Urol 185(4):1461–1467. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2010.11.048
Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML et al (2009) The Clavien–Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg 250(2):187–196. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b13ca2
Tasian GE, Casale P (2015) The robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty: gateway to advanced reconstruction. Urol Clin North Am 42(1):89–97. doi:10.1016/j.ucl.2014.09.008
Monn MF, Bahler CD, Schneider EB, Sundaram CP (2013) Emerging trends in robotic pyeloplasty for the management of ureteropelvic junction obstruction in adults. J Urol 189(4):1352–1357. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2012.10.001
Passerotti CC, Passerotti AM, Dall’Oglio MF et al (2009) Comparing the quality of the suture anastomosis and the learning curves associated with performing open, freehand, and robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in a swine animal model. J Am Coll Surg 208(4):576–586. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.01.010
Tasian GE, Wiebe DJ, Casale P (2013) Learning curve of robotic assisted pyeloplasty for pediatric urology fellows. J Urol 190(4 Suppl):1622–1626. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2013.02.009
Hayashi Y, Mizuno K, Kurokawa S et al (2014) Extravesical robot-assisted laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation for vesicoureteral reflux: initial experience in Japan with the ureteral advancement technique. Int J Urol. doi:10.1111/iju.12483
Szydelko T, Kasprzak J, Lewandowski J, Apoznanski W, Dembowski J (2012) Dismembered laparoscopic Anderson–Hynes pyeloplasty versus nondismembered laparoscopic Y–V pyeloplasty in the treatment of patients with primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a prospective study. J Endourol 26(9):1165–1170. doi:10.1089/end.2011.0642
Erdeljan P, Caumartin Y, Warren J et al (2010) Robot-assisted pyeloplasty: follow-up of first Canadian experience with comparison of outcomes between experienced and trainee surgeons. J Endourol 24(9):1447–1450. doi:10.1089/end.2009.0617
Inagaki T, Rha KH, Ong AM, Kavoussi LR, Jarrett TW (2005) Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: current status. BJU Int 95(Suppl 2):102–105. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05208.x
Nerli RB, Reddy MN, Jali SM, Hiremath MB (2014) Preliminary experience with laparoscopic Foley’s YV plasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children. J Minim Access Surg 10(2):72–75. doi:10.4103/0972-9941.129953
Hemal AK, Mishra S, Mukharjee S, Suryavanshi M (2008) Robot assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in patients of ureteropelvic junction obstruction with previously failed open surgical repair. Int J Urol 15(8):744–746. doi:10.1111/j.1442-2042.2008.02091.x
Niver BE, Agalliu I, Bareket R et al (2012) Analysis of robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyleloplasty for primary versus secondary repair in 119 consecutive cases. Urology 79(3):689–694. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2011.10.072
Murthy P, Cohn JA, Gundeti MS (2015) Evaluation of robotic-assisted laparoscopic and open pyeloplasty in children: single-surgeon experience. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 97(2):109–114. doi:10.1308/003588414x14055925058797
Lindgren BW, Frainey BT, Cheng EY, Yerkes EB, Gong EM (2014) Robot assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in obese and non-obese patients. J Pediatr Urol. doi:10.1016/j.jpurol.2014.05.013
Kutikov A, Nguyen M, Guzzo T, Canter D, Casale P (2006) Robot assisted pyeloplasty in the infant-lessons learned. J Urol 176(5):2237–2239. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2006.07.059 (discussion 2239–2240)
Bansal D, Cost NG, Bean CM et al (2014) Infant robot-assisted laparoscopic upper urinary tract reconstructive surgery. J Pediatr Urol. doi:10.1016/j.jpurol.2014.01.029
Varda BK, Johnson EK, Clark C et al (2014) National trends of perioperative outcomes and costs for open, laparoscopic and robotic pediatric pyeloplasty. J Urol 191(4):1090–1096. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2013.10.077
Authors’ contributions
Kentaro Mizuno was involved in data collection, data analysis, and manuscript writing; Yoshiyuki Kojima was involved in project development and manuscript editing; Satoshi Kurokawa, Hideyuki Kamisawa, Hidenori Nishio, and Yoshinobu Moritoki was involved in data collection; Akihiro Nakane and Tetsuji Maruyama was involved in data analysis; Atsushi Okada and Noriyasu Kawai was involved in data management; Keiichi Tozawa and Kenjiro Kohri was involved in project development; Takahiro Yasui and Yutaro Hayashi was involved in project development and manuscript editing.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
Author Kentaro Mizuno, Author Yoshiyuki Kojima, Author Satoshi Kurokawa, Author Hideyuki Kamisawa, Author Hidenori Nishio, Author Yoshinobu Moritoki, Author Akihiro Nakane, Author Tetsuji Maruyama, Author Atsushi Okada, Author Noriyasu Kawai, Author Keiichi Tozawa, Author Kenjiro Kohri, Author Takahiro Yasui, and Author Yutaro Hayashi declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical standards
All procedures described in this article were performed as a clinical trial (No. 46-12-0004) at the Nagoya City University Hospital following institutional review board approval.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mizuno, K., Kojima, Y., Kurokawa, S. et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction: comparison between pediatric and adult patients-Japanese series. J Robotic Surg 11, 151–157 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-016-0633-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-016-0633-5