Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
World J Urol. 2012 Oct;30(5):605-11. doi: 10.1007/s00345-011-0740-x. Epub 2011 Aug 23.

Small-incision access retroperitoneoscopic technique (SMART) pyeloplasty in adult patients: comparison of cosmetic and post-operative pain outcomes in a matched-pair analysis with standard retroperitoneoscopy: preliminary report.

Author information

  • 1Department of Urology, SLK Kliniken Heilbronn, University of Heidelberg, Am Gesundbrunnen 20-24, 74078 Heilbronn, Germany.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

To present small-incision access retroperitoneoscopic technique pyeloplasty (SMARTp), a novel mini-laparoscopic approach for management of uretero-pelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) in adults including comparison with the standard retroperitoneoscopic technique (SRTp).

METHODS:

In a non-randomised study, we matched 12 adult patients treated from August to November 2010 by SMARTp with 12 patients treated with SRTp from January to November 2010. Mini-laparoscopic retroperitoneal space was created with a home-made 6-mm balloon trocar. One 6-mm (for 5-mm 30° telescope) and two 3.5-mm trocars (for 3-mm working instrument) were used. SRTp was performed with 11- and 6-mm trocar. Primary endpoints included evaluation of cosmetic appearance and post-operative pain evaluated respectively by the patient and observer scar assessment scale (POSAS) and analogue visual scale (VAS). Secondary endpoints were comparison between operative and functional parameters.

RESULTS:

Cosmetic cumulative results were statistically significant in favour of SMARTp (POSAS: 37.9 vs. 52.4; P = 0.002). A better trend has been shown by post-operative pain (first to fourth day VAS), although not statistically significant (4.2 vs. 4.9, P = 0.891). No differences were recorded in terms of operative time, pre- and post-operative Hb difference, DJ-stent removal and resistive index (RI) improvement. The SMARTp group showed a faster drain removal (2.4 vs. 3.4 day, P = 0.004) and discharge (4.5 vs. 5.4 day P = 0.017).

CONCLUSIONS:

Preliminary data support SMARTp as safe procedures in experienced hands, providing better cosmetic results compared to SRTp. Further studies and clinical randomised trial performed in a larger population sample are requested.

PMID:
21861125
DOI:
10.1007/s00345-011-0740-x
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Springer
    Loading ...
    Support Center