Comparison of the outcomes of laparoscopic pyeloplasty with and without concomitant pyelolithotomy

ABSTRACT Objective We aimed to evaluate the results of laparoscopic pyeloplasty with concomitant pyelolithotomy and compare results with a cohort of patients undergoing laparoscopic pyeloplasty without pyelolithotomy. Materials and Methods We retrospectively reviewed records of 43 patients undergoing transperitoneal laparoscopic Anderson-Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty between December 2012 and July 2018 at our department. Eighteen patients (42%) underwent laparoscopic pyeloplasty with concomitant pyelolithotomy. The results of patients with renal stones were compared with 25 matched patients undergoing laparoscopic pyeloplasty without concomitant renal stones. Demographic data, operative and stone parameters were compared between the groups. Results The groups were similar regarding to demographic characteristics. All operations were completed laparoscopically with no conversions to open surgery. In 3 cases without renal stones and 15 cases with renal stones, transposition of the ureter due to crossing vessels was performed. The mean stone size was 13±5.24 mm, and the median number of stones was 1 (1-18). The success of laparoscopic pyeloplasty with and without pyelolithotomy was 93.3% and 92.9%, respectively, as confirmed by negative diuretic renogram at postoperative 3rd months. Overall stone-free rate after laparoscopic pyelolithotomy was 93.3%. Mean operative time was 222.6765.71 minutes vs. 219.11±75.63 minutes for the pyeloplasty with concomitant pyelolithotomy vs. pyeloplasty, respectively (p=0.88). Conclusions Laparoscopic pyeloplasty with concomitant pyelolithotomy is a safe and effective intervention with associated good cosmetic results and high stone-free rates without significant increase in operative time or complications.

Ureterocalycostomy - final resort in the management of secondary pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction: our experience

ABSTRACT: Ureterocalycostomy can be performed in patients in whom desired methods of treating secondary PUJ (Pelvi-Ureteric Junction) obstructions either failed or could not be used. In our study, one child and two adults in whom one redo-ureterocalycostomy and two ureterocalycostomies were performed for severely scarred PUJ. The causes for secondary PUJ obstruction were post-pyelolithotomy in one case, post-pyeloplasty and ureterocalycostomy for PUJ obstruction in the second patient and the third patient had long upper ureteric stricture post-ureteropyeloplasty due to tuberculosis. In all these cases ureterocalycostomy proved to be salvage/final resort for preserving functional renal unit