Robot-assisted pyeloplasty and laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children: A comparison of single-port-plus-one and multiport surgery
ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the effects of various trocar placements in robot-assisted and laparoscopic pyeloplasty involving children diagnosed with obstruction of the ureteropelvic junction (OUPJ).MethodsWe retrospectively collected the data on 74 patients under 14 years of age who had be...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022-10-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Pediatrics |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fped.2022.957790/full |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832591480551636992 |
|---|---|
| author | Jianglong Chen Jianglong Chen Huihuang Xu Huihuang Xu Shan Lin Shan Lin Shaohua He Shaohua He Kunbin Tang Kunbin Tang Zhixiang Xiao Zhixiang Xiao Di Xu Di Xu |
| author_facet | Jianglong Chen Jianglong Chen Huihuang Xu Huihuang Xu Shan Lin Shan Lin Shaohua He Shaohua He Kunbin Tang Kunbin Tang Zhixiang Xiao Zhixiang Xiao Di Xu Di Xu |
| author_sort | Jianglong Chen |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the effects of various trocar placements in robot-assisted and laparoscopic pyeloplasty involving children diagnosed with obstruction of the ureteropelvic junction (OUPJ).MethodsWe retrospectively collected the data on 74 patients under 14 years of age who had been diagnosed with OUPJ; these patients underwent either robot-assisted or laparoscopic pyeloplasty in our hospital between January 2015 and November 2021. There were four groups, as follows:
•Laparoscopic multiport pyeloplasty (LMPY),•Laparoscopic single-port pyeloplasty (LSPY),•Robotic-assisted multiport pyeloplasty (RMPY),•Robotic-assisted single-port-plus-one pyeloplasty (RSPY).Patients' characteristics as well as their perioperative and follow-up data were collected and evaluated.ResultsThere was no significant difference in the data regarding patients' characteristics. These data included the grade of hydronephrosis according to the Society of Fetal Urology (SFU grade), anterior and posterior diameter of the renal pelvis and ureter (APDRPU), and the differential degree of renal function (DRF) at following time points: preoperative, postoperative, and comparison of preoperative and postoperative. There was no difference among these groups. During surgery, the time of trocar placement, urethroplasty time, and total operative time in the robotic groups (RMPY and RSPY) were longer than those in the laparoscopic groups (LMPY and LSPY). However, the ratio of the urethroplasty time and full operative time (UT/WT) in the robotic groups (RMPY and RSPY) was lower than that in the laparoscopic groups (LMPY and LSPY) (P = 0.0075). Also, the volume of blood loss was lower in the robotic groups (RMPY and RSPY) than that in the laparoscopic groups (LMPY and LSPY), although there was no statistical difference (P = 0.11). There were, however, significant differences in hospitalization days (P < 0.0001) and parents' cosmetic satisfaction scores (P < 0.001). There were no differences in fasting time, the length of time that a ureteral catheter remained in place, or the number of postoperative complications.ConclusionOur study shows that both robotic multiple-port and single-port-plus-one approaches are comparable, with laparoscopic multiple-port and single-port approaches equally effective in resolving OUPJ in children. Robotic and single-port-plus-one approaches may be associated with some advantages in hospitalization time and cosmetic outcomes; therefore, these approaches may be useful in urologic surgery that requires precise suturing, especially in pediatric patients. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-dffe69d51f5d49efa79ffd5b5b25ed4d |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2296-2360 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2022-10-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Pediatrics |
| spelling | doaj-art-dffe69d51f5d49efa79ffd5b5b25ed4d2025-01-22T11:32:58ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Pediatrics2296-23602022-10-011010.3389/fped.2022.957790957790Robot-assisted pyeloplasty and laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children: A comparison of single-port-plus-one and multiport surgeryJianglong Chen0Jianglong Chen1Huihuang Xu2Huihuang Xu3Shan Lin4Shan Lin5Shaohua He6Shaohua He7Kunbin Tang8Kunbin Tang9Zhixiang Xiao10Zhixiang Xiao11Di Xu12Di Xu13Shengli Clinical Medical College, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, ChinaDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, ChinaShengli Clinical Medical College, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, ChinaDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, ChinaShengli Clinical Medical College, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, ChinaDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, ChinaShengli Clinical Medical College, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, ChinaDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, ChinaShengli Clinical Medical College, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, ChinaDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, ChinaShengli Clinical Medical College, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, ChinaDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, ChinaShengli Clinical Medical College, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, ChinaDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, ChinaObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the effects of various trocar placements in robot-assisted and laparoscopic pyeloplasty involving children diagnosed with obstruction of the ureteropelvic junction (OUPJ).MethodsWe retrospectively collected the data on 74 patients under 14 years of age who had been diagnosed with OUPJ; these patients underwent either robot-assisted or laparoscopic pyeloplasty in our hospital between January 2015 and November 2021. There were four groups, as follows: •Laparoscopic multiport pyeloplasty (LMPY),•Laparoscopic single-port pyeloplasty (LSPY),•Robotic-assisted multiport pyeloplasty (RMPY),•Robotic-assisted single-port-plus-one pyeloplasty (RSPY).Patients' characteristics as well as their perioperative and follow-up data were collected and evaluated.ResultsThere was no significant difference in the data regarding patients' characteristics. These data included the grade of hydronephrosis according to the Society of Fetal Urology (SFU grade), anterior and posterior diameter of the renal pelvis and ureter (APDRPU), and the differential degree of renal function (DRF) at following time points: preoperative, postoperative, and comparison of preoperative and postoperative. There was no difference among these groups. During surgery, the time of trocar placement, urethroplasty time, and total operative time in the robotic groups (RMPY and RSPY) were longer than those in the laparoscopic groups (LMPY and LSPY). However, the ratio of the urethroplasty time and full operative time (UT/WT) in the robotic groups (RMPY and RSPY) was lower than that in the laparoscopic groups (LMPY and LSPY) (P = 0.0075). Also, the volume of blood loss was lower in the robotic groups (RMPY and RSPY) than that in the laparoscopic groups (LMPY and LSPY), although there was no statistical difference (P = 0.11). There were, however, significant differences in hospitalization days (P < 0.0001) and parents' cosmetic satisfaction scores (P < 0.001). There were no differences in fasting time, the length of time that a ureteral catheter remained in place, or the number of postoperative complications.ConclusionOur study shows that both robotic multiple-port and single-port-plus-one approaches are comparable, with laparoscopic multiple-port and single-port approaches equally effective in resolving OUPJ in children. Robotic and single-port-plus-one approaches may be associated with some advantages in hospitalization time and cosmetic outcomes; therefore, these approaches may be useful in urologic surgery that requires precise suturing, especially in pediatric patients.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fped.2022.957790/fullUPJOpyeloplastyroboticsingle-portpediatric |
| spellingShingle | Jianglong Chen Jianglong Chen Huihuang Xu Huihuang Xu Shan Lin Shan Lin Shaohua He Shaohua He Kunbin Tang Kunbin Tang Zhixiang Xiao Zhixiang Xiao Di Xu Di Xu Robot-assisted pyeloplasty and laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children: A comparison of single-port-plus-one and multiport surgery Frontiers in Pediatrics UPJO pyeloplasty robotic single-port pediatric |
| title | Robot-assisted pyeloplasty and laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children: A comparison of single-port-plus-one and multiport surgery |
| title_full | Robot-assisted pyeloplasty and laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children: A comparison of single-port-plus-one and multiport surgery |
| title_fullStr | Robot-assisted pyeloplasty and laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children: A comparison of single-port-plus-one and multiport surgery |
| title_full_unstemmed | Robot-assisted pyeloplasty and laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children: A comparison of single-port-plus-one and multiport surgery |
| title_short | Robot-assisted pyeloplasty and laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children: A comparison of single-port-plus-one and multiport surgery |
| title_sort | robot assisted pyeloplasty and laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children a comparison of single port plus one and multiport surgery |
| topic | UPJO pyeloplasty robotic single-port pediatric |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fped.2022.957790/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT jianglongchen robotassistedpyeloplastyandlaparoscopicpyeloplastyinchildrenacomparisonofsingleportplusoneandmultiportsurgery AT jianglongchen robotassistedpyeloplastyandlaparoscopicpyeloplastyinchildrenacomparisonofsingleportplusoneandmultiportsurgery AT huihuangxu robotassistedpyeloplastyandlaparoscopicpyeloplastyinchildrenacomparisonofsingleportplusoneandmultiportsurgery AT huihuangxu robotassistedpyeloplastyandlaparoscopicpyeloplastyinchildrenacomparisonofsingleportplusoneandmultiportsurgery AT shanlin robotassistedpyeloplastyandlaparoscopicpyeloplastyinchildrenacomparisonofsingleportplusoneandmultiportsurgery AT shanlin robotassistedpyeloplastyandlaparoscopicpyeloplastyinchildrenacomparisonofsingleportplusoneandmultiportsurgery AT shaohuahe robotassistedpyeloplastyandlaparoscopicpyeloplastyinchildrenacomparisonofsingleportplusoneandmultiportsurgery AT shaohuahe robotassistedpyeloplastyandlaparoscopicpyeloplastyinchildrenacomparisonofsingleportplusoneandmultiportsurgery AT kunbintang robotassistedpyeloplastyandlaparoscopicpyeloplastyinchildrenacomparisonofsingleportplusoneandmultiportsurgery AT kunbintang robotassistedpyeloplastyandlaparoscopicpyeloplastyinchildrenacomparisonofsingleportplusoneandmultiportsurgery AT zhixiangxiao robotassistedpyeloplastyandlaparoscopicpyeloplastyinchildrenacomparisonofsingleportplusoneandmultiportsurgery AT zhixiangxiao robotassistedpyeloplastyandlaparoscopicpyeloplastyinchildrenacomparisonofsingleportplusoneandmultiportsurgery AT dixu robotassistedpyeloplastyandlaparoscopicpyeloplastyinchildrenacomparisonofsingleportplusoneandmultiportsurgery AT dixu robotassistedpyeloplastyandlaparoscopicpyeloplastyinchildrenacomparisonofsingleportplusoneandmultiportsurgery |