Laparoscopic pyelolithotomy

Is laparoscopic pyelolithotomy an alternative to percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treatment of kidney stones larger than 2.5 cm in pediatric patients?

PURPOSE

The aim was to compare laparoscopic pyelolithotomy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in terms of efficacy and safety for the treatment of renal pelvis stones larger than 2.5 cm in pediatric patients.

METHODS

Our study consisted of two groups. Group 1 included 33 patients who underwent laparoscopic pyelolithotomy (LPL) between January 2013 and March 2022, and group 2 included 39 patients who underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). The basic clinical parameters of the patients were recorded. Mean operation time, stone size, estimated blood loss, blood transfusion rate, postoperative hospital stay, stone-free rate, postoperative analgesia requirements, intraoperative complications, and early and late postoperative complications were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

In our study, the mean age of the patients in groups 1 and 2 was 8.89 ± 1.58 years and 9.1 ± 1.85 years, respectively (p = 0.657). The mean stone size was 2.37 ± 0.38 cm in group 1 and 2.55 ± 0.45 cm in group 2 (p = 0.64). The mean operation time was 85.65 ± 20.55 min in group 1, while it was 76.11 ± 13.12 min in group 2 (p = 0.08). The stone-free rate was 100% in both groups. Intraoperative mean blood loss, need for postoperative analgesia, blood transfusion and intraoperative complication rates were significantly higher in the PCNL group (p < 0.01, p = 0.02, p < 0.01, p < 0.01, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our results show that laparoscopic pyelolithotomy is a safe and effective method for pediatric patients with large kidney stones.

Laparoscopic Surgery in Pediatric Upper Tract Urolithiasis: An Alternate Modality

Introduction

Incidence of pediatric urolithiasis has increased over the last few decades. Procedures such as extracorporeal short wave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotripsy, and ureterorenoscopic lithotripsy are not widely available for pediatric age group in many developing countries. It is desirable that advantages of minimally invasive surgery be offered to selected cases with urolithiasis.

Materials and Methods

All patients with pediatric upper tract urolithiasis managed laparoscopically from January 2015 to April 2020 were retrospectively reviewed.

Results

A total of 38 patients were included. The mean age of the patients was 8 ± 2.85 years. Thirty-four patients (renal and upper ureteric) were managed through retroperitoneal approach, while those with lower ureteric calculi (n = 4) were approached transperitoneally. A total of eight patients required conversion to open technique. The stone clearance rate was 79% by laparoscopic approach alone. There were no procedure-related complications.

Conclusion

Our study suggests that laparoscopic management for pediatric upper tract urolithiasis is a radiation-free, single-time curative treatment and is feasible in centers where facilities for other endoscopic procedures are unavailable.

Management of Pediatric Urolithiasis Using a Combination of Laparoscopic Lithotomy and Pyeloscopy

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive procedures have become the standard option for treatment of urinary stones; the use of more invasive techniques is not a common practice currently. This emergent technology is not always available and laparoscopy is the alternative option. There are few reports of laparoscopic management for urinary lithiasis in pediatric patients. This study is about the use of laparoscopic surgery combined with pyeloscopy as a feasible first-line treatment for pediatric urolithiasis in renal and proximal ureteral locations.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We reviewed the records of 14 patients with renal and proximal ureteral stones who underwent laparoscopic pyelolithotomy and pyeloscopy in a period from January 2011 to July 2016. The outcome measures were needed for auxiliary procedures, treatment success, and complication rates.

RESULTS

A total of 16 procedures were carried out in 14 patients, 15 transperitoneal and 1 retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyelolithotomies were done. It was necessary to perform upper ureterolithotomies to remove ureteral stones in 2 cases. The holmium laser and/or pneumatic lithotripter were used to fragment staghorn calculi. Some of the complications were blood transfusion in 12.5% and self-limited urinary leak in 18.7% of the patients. The success rate after undergoing one procedure was 92.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

Transperitoneal or retroperitoneal laparoscopic lithotomy is a safe and feasible procedure for the treatment of pediatric urolithiasis. It can be an alternative to shock-wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy when these are not feasible or possible.

Laparoendoscopic single-site pyelolithotomy with use of a carter-thomason needle grasper

PURPOSE

To study the feasibility and safety of the procedure, we present our early experience with laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) pyelolithotomy performed by use of a Carter-Thomason needle grasper.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four patients underwent LESS pyelolithotomy for the removal of renal pelvic stones. The patients' mean age was 57.8 years, and their mean body mass index was 23.01. We used a homemade single-port device made with a surgical glove that was inserted into a 2.5-cm periumbilical incision. The operation was performed transperitoneally by using a Carter-Thomason grasper. After removal of the stone, a double-J stent was placed in situ, and laparoscopic intracorporeal suturing was performed. No additional ports were used.

RESULTS

All surgeries were completed successfully without conversion to conventional laparoscopy or open surgery. The mean operative time was 124.5 minutes, and the mean estimated blood loss was 255.2 mL. There were no significant complications, except in one patient who required a blood transfusion. The mean duration of hospital stay was 8.3 days. The mean stone size was 3.9 cm. Chemical analysis of the stones showed that three patients had calcium-containing stones and one patient had a uric acid stone. Postoperative radiologic study showed a stone clearance rate of 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results, albeit limited, showed that LESS pyelolithotomy is a feasible and safe procedure. Especially with the use of a Carter-Thomason needle grasper, this operation can be performed without an additional port.

[Umbilical single-port pyelolithectomy on horseshoe kidney: a new indication]

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic surgery through a single port is an evolution of laparoscopic surgery, possible after recent technological development of new access systems. It is an established minimally invasive technique, although its indications in the field of Urology are currently under development.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We present the first case of incision-less pyelolithectomy, performed through a single-port placed in the umbilicus, performed in a 47 years-old male patient (38.2 BMI) with solitary 4 cm diameter lithiasis in a horseshoe kidney. An umbilical 2.5 cm incision was used for the introduction of a prototype of the reusable Richard Wolf single-port system, without any ancillary elements.

RESULTS

After placement of left double-J stent proximal left ureter and renal pelvis, pyelolithectomy and pyelorraphy were performed with DuoRotate-Instruments© (Richard Wolf). Water-tightness was demostrated with methylene blue intravesical instillation and no drain was placed. The procedure lasted for 280 min and bleeding was 30 cc. The patient was discharged 24 hours later without pain.

CONCLUSION

Incision-less pyelolithectomy is a feasible and resolutive option to treat pelvic lithiasis. It can be considered the most beneficial option in aesthetical terms in experienced centers, especially in peculiar cases like horseshoe kidney.

Retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyelolithotomy: how does it compare with percutaneous nephrolithotomy for larger stones?

Our 10-year experience of retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyelolithotomy, a rarely performed minimally invasive operative procedure, is presented. The results are compared with our own experience of percutaneous nephrolithotomy for larger renal stones. Forty-two patients with a mean age of 39.12 years underwent 43 retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyelolithotomies using Gaur's balloon technique. The total number of stones was 65 (44 pelvic and 21 calyceal) and they ranged in size between 5 and 48 mm. Two patients had chronic renal failure due to bilateral impacted renal calculi. Forty-eight percutaneous nephrolithotomies performed in the same unit during the last 2 years in patients with non-staghorn calculi > 2 cm were included for a comparative study. The open conversion rate and the drainage period for retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyelolithotomy were much higher. However, the operative time, blood loss, analgesic intake, hospital stay, residual stone rate, re-treatment rate and major complication rates were lower, compared with percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Laparoscopic Pyelolithotomy With Intraperitoneal Ultrasonic Lithotripsy: Report of a Novel Minimally Invasive Technique for Intracorporeal Stone Ablation

We present the case of a 71-year-old Hispanic woman with a 4-cm stone in the renal pelvis of a kidney with thin parenchyma. Retrograde pyelography revealed a normal ureter and normal ureteropelvic junction. A ureteral stent was placed. Six weeks after the stent was placed, a differential renal scan revealed 18% function of the involved kidney. A percutaneous nephrolithotomy was not performed because of the thin parenchyma and intrarenal anatomy, which would have complicated access. The patient underwent an uncomplicated laparoscopic pyelolithotomy. The stone was placed into an Endocatch entrapment sack. The open end of the Endocatch sack was brought through a trocar site, and a nephroscope and ultrasonic lithotripter were deployed. The stone was fragmented and aspirated in the standard manner, thereby avoiding the need to extend the 12-mm trocar incision for stone extraction. The stone fragmentation and extraction time was 14 minutes. The patient was stone-free and discharged home in the morning of the first postoperative day without complications.

Management of Pelvic Stones Larger than 20 mm: Laparoscopic Transperitoneal Pyelolithotomy or Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy?

Large pelvic stones are frequently managed with percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) but laparoscopic transperitoneal pyelolithotomy (LTP) can be an alternative. We compared PCNL and LTP for the treatment of pelvic stones >20 mm in diameter.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between November 1999 and November 2004, 16 consecutive patients, mean age 42, with a single pelvic stone >20 x 10 mm (group I), underwent LTP as first-line treatment or after shockwave lithotripsy failure. They were compared with a similar population of 16 consecutive patients, mean age 45 (group II), who underwent PCNL for the same indication and were assessed retrospectively. We evaluated operative characteristics, complications, and results for each technique.

RESULTS

There was no difference between the two groups regarding the characteristics of patients and stones. Operative time duration was significantly longer in group I (129 vs. 75 min; p = 0.001) and conversion was required in 2 patients (12%). The main postoperative complications were urinary leakage (2 patients, 12%) in group I and bleeding (3 patients, 18%) in group II, but only 1 required blood transfusion. Mean hospital stay was respectively 6.5 and 5.6 days in groups I and II (p = 0.17). Stone-free rates were assessed at 3 months and were not different between group I and group II (88 vs. 82%).

CONCLUSIONS

The operative time of LTP is longer and the results of both techniques are comparable but postoperative morbidity is different. Specific indications of each technique must be determined although PCNL remains the gold standard for most large pelvic stones.

Role of laparoscopy in management of renal stones: single-center experience and review of literature

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Laparoscopy can be an alternative modality in the management of renal stones. We present our experience with laparoscopic renal stone surgery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eighteen patients (4 males, 14 females) with mean age of 51 years (range 18-86 years) underwent 19 laparoscopic procedures. The mean stone number and size, excluding five patients who had nephrectomy/heminephrectomy, were 1.9 (range 1-5) and 1.3 cm (range 0.5-4.5 cm), respectively. Three patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction underwent pyeloplasty and concomitant pyelolithotomy. Three patients with upper-pole caliceal-diverticular stones had nephrolithotomy and fulguration of the diverticular mucosa. Three patients with stones and hydrocalix with scarred cortex had partial nephrectomy, two under cold and one under warm ischemia. Five patients, including one with a horseshoe kidney (who had one procedure on each kidney), had pyelolithotomy as an alternative to percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Patients with stones in a nonfunctioning kidney underwent nephrectomy (three patients) or heminephrectomy (one patient).

RESULTS

All procedures were completed laparoscopically. The operative time was variable depending on the complexity of the procedures, from 115 minutes for Fengerplasty to 315 minutes for partial nephrectomy under cold ischemia (mean 178 minutes). The estimated blood loss was 53.2 mL (range 20-120 ml), and none of the patients received a blood transfusion. Complete stone clearance was achieved in 93% of the procedures. The mean hospital stay was 10.5 days (range 5-35 days). Three patients needed temporary pigtail-catheter drainage for obstruction after pyelolithotomy. One patient with a solitary kidney and infected staghorn calculus had prolonged urinary leak, which stopped with conservative management. One nephrectomy for nephrocutaneous fistula was complicated by a late colonic perforation necessitating colostomy.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery is effective for complex renal stones and allows for adjunctive procedures. It can also be an alternative to percutaneous nephrolithotomy. It complements other minimally invasive procedures, and a need for open stone surgery should be rare in the future.

Evaluation of role of retroperitoneoscopic pyelolithotomy and its comparison with percutaneous nephrolithotripsy

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the role of retroperitoneoscopic pyelolithotomy (RPPL) for the management of renal pelvic calculus and its comparison with percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PCNL).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eighteen RPPLs were performed between March 1995 and March 2002, and 16 out of these were compared retrospectively with 12 cases of PCNL performed in the year 2000 for solitary renal pelvic stone more than 3-cm in size. Laparoscopic pyelolithotomy was carried out with retroperitoneal approach and subsequent to stone removal pyelotomy was sutured with intracorporeal interrupted sutures.

RESULTS

The two groups were similar as regards the patient age and sex. The mean stone sizes in RPPL and PCNL groups were 3.6 and 4.2 cm respectively (p < 0.006). There were 2 conversions in the RPPL group due to stone migration into calyx and dense perirenal adhesions making dissection difficult. The mean operating time was 142.18 min for RPPL as compared to 71.6 min for PCNL (p < 0.000). The blood loss was 173.1 ml in RPPL as compared to 147.9 ml for PCNL (p NS). The mean hospital stay was 3.8 and 3-days in RPPL and PCNL groups respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic pyelolithotomy takes longer to perform, more invasive, less cosmetic and requires more skills at present as compared to PCNL. In this limited study it is clearly demonstrated that PCNL is the better treatment modality for renal stones and laparoscopy should be offered to those who needs adjunctive procedure such as pyeloplasty or puncture during PCNL under vision.

Laparoscopic Reconstructive Urology

PURPOSE

Although laparoscopy has emerged as a feasible and effective alternative for a majority of open ablative abdominopelvic urological procedures, minimally invasive reconstruction has come to the forefront only recently. We present the current state of the art of laparoscopic reconstructive urology.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted an extensive MEDLINE search of purely laparoscopic surgery from 1976 through 2002. Based on the results, we divide clinical reconstructive laparoscopic procedures into 2 broad categories-established and evolving. Each category is further classified according to the organ involved-adrenal and kidney, ureter (evolving only), bladder and prostate, and miscellaneous. Clinical procedures were considered established if our literature review revealed any report of more than 100 patients, or reports from at least 5 different centers greater than 20 patients each. If these criteria were not met, the procedure was considered clinically evolving.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic reconstructive procedures such as pyeloplasty, radical prostatectomy and orchiopexy have achieved clinically established status. Laparoscopic bladder neck suspension, although reported in a significant number of cases, remains controversial because of its contradictory reported long-term success rates. Multiple additional laparoscopic reconstructive procedures have been performed in fewer numbers clinically with promising results.

CONCLUSIONS

Until recently, urological laparoscopic surgery primarily focused on ablative procedures, with success. Building on this initial experience, advanced and sophisticated reconstructive procedures of considerable technical complexity are increasingly being performed purely laparoscopically. It is anticipated that in the future laparoscopic surgery could increasingly evolve into a preferred approach for advanced and sophisticated urological reconstruction.

Retroperitoneal Laparoscopic Pyelolithotomy for Staghorn Stones

PURPOSE

To establish the feasibility of the retroperitoneal laparoscopic approach for treatment of patients with staghorn renal calculi who are under consideration for an open pyelolithotomy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyelolithotomy was performed in three patients with impacted staghorn renal calculi between 22 and 45 mm in largest diameter. One of the patients also had multiple caliceal stones. These patients wanted an open procedure but had agreed to have their stone removal done laparoscopically in view of our experience. The previously described retroperitoneal laparoscopic approach was used, and the handling of some of the specific problems in such patients is described in the text.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

The stones were removed successfully in all the three patients, and there were no complications. Although no definitive conclusion can be drawn from this small series, the paper shows the feasibility of the retroperitoneal laparoscopic approach in a select group of patients with staghorn renal calculi.

A transperitoneal laparoscopic approach to endourology

Although endoscopic methods have become the preferred means of management for many diseases facing the genitourinary surgeon, a laparoscopic approach might be considered comparable or advantageous in select circumstances. In the literature, laparoscopists reporting their work have favored the transperitoneal approach; however, there are clear advantages and disadvantages to both transperitoneal and retroperitoneal laparoscopy. Intracorporeal suturing remains the most time-consuming aspect of reconstructive surgery, and research emphasis has been on suturing devices and novel anastomotic techniques. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty is efficacious and should be considered, particularly in the case of a capacious renal pelvis, crossing vessel, or failed previous endopyelotomy. Laparoscopic pyelolithotomy is uniquely suitable for patients with aberrant anatomy, such as a horseshoe kidney, and may be performed concurrently with pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction. The use of laparoscopic extravesical ureteral reimplantation awaits further development in both open and subtrigonal injection techniques. Its use in colposuspension is undetermined and requires further study as suturing technology improves. During laparoscopic exploration, it is possible to address intraoperative injuries to the ureter and bladder laparoscopically. In summary, laparoscopic surgery of the urinary tract is a "work in progress," but it offers promise for some of the most challenging of circumstances. As the technology advances and the clinical experience widens, the indications and contraindications for these techniques will be better established.

Laparoscopic renal surgery via a retroperitoneal approach in children

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic procedures are still not widely performed by pediatric urologists due to operative time and costs as well as the lack of indications and, thus, the lack of sufficient surgeon experience. We report our experience with the retroperitoneal approach using special inexpensive methods for various indications in children.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 1994 to 1997 we performed 42 retroperitoneal laparoscopic procedures in 41 children with a mean age of 4 years, including 31 nephrectomies, 8 partial nephrectomies, 2 renal cystectomies and 1 pyelolithotomy. A total of 13 patients were younger than 1 year. Followup ranged from 6 months to 3 years.

RESULTS

Mean operative time was 104 minutes (range 35 to 150) for nephrectomy, 153 (range 90 to 210) for upper pole nephroureterectomy, 135 for pyelolithotomy and 60 for renal cystectomy. Average postoperative stay was 2 days. Conversion was required in 2 cases of partial nephrectomy due to unidentified polar vessels, including 1 involving duodenal perforation.

CONCLUSIONS

The indications for retroperitoneal laparoscopy are expanding with the experience of the surgical team. The retroperitoneal approach provides a technique comparable to that of conventional renal surgery.