Infant Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Outcomes at a Single Institution, and Tips for Safety and Success
Background: Since its first description, multiple reports proved efficacy and safety of the robotic platform. Further progress has been made allowing for the application of robotic surgery to smaller patients, including infants. Despite the early favorable results, the use of robot surgery in infant...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Andolfi, Ciro [verfasserIn] Rodríguez, Veronica M. [verfasserIn] Galansky, Logan [verfasserIn] Gundeti, Mohan S. [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2021 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: European urology - Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1976, 80, Seite 621-631 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:80 ; pages:621-631 |
| DOI / URN: |
10.1016/j.eururo.2021.06.019 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
ELV006778577 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ELV006778577 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230524162041.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 230506s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.06.019 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)ELV006778577 | ||
| 035 | |a (ELSEVIER)S0302-2838(21)01860-1 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q DE-600 |
| 084 | |a 44.88 |2 bkl | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Andolfi, Ciro |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0002-1844-377X |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Infant Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Outcomes at a Single Institution, and Tips for Safety and Success |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2021 | |
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Background: Since its first description, multiple reports proved efficacy and safety of the robotic platform. Further progress has been made allowing for the application of robotic surgery to smaller patients, including infants. Despite the early favorable results, the use of robot surgery in infants is still controversial and more studies are needed to confirm its benefits.Objective: To our knowledge, we present the largest single-institution case series of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RAL-P) in infants, aiming to contribute to the current literature with a guide for key technical steps and safety tips for infant RAL-P.Design, setting, and participants: We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board.Surgical procedure: Only infants (≤12 mo of age) with a diagnosis of congenital ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were included in the study.Measurements: We critically reviewed the clinical outcomes, described the main steps of the operation, and shared tips for a safe approach.Results and limitations: From January 2012 to August 2019, 44 infants underwent RAL-P for UPJO––33 (75%) males and 11 (25%) females. All robotic cases were completed successfully, with no laparotomic conversions. The median age and weight were 4 (1–12) mo and 6.8 (3.8–10.5) kg, respectively. The mean operative time was 142 (±25) min. The mean estimated blood loss was 7 (±3.6) ml, and no intraoperative complications occurred. The mean length of hospital stay (LOS) was 1.4 (±0.7) d. Seven (15.6%) patients had postoperative complications—one (2%) ileus (Clavien-Dindo grade [CDG] I), four (9%) urinary tract infections (CDG II), and two (4.5%) port-site hernias (CDG III). At a median follow-up of 19 mo, the success rate was 100%.Conclusions: Given the successful outcomes, benefits of decreased LOS, and improved cosmesis, RAL-P is an appealing management option for UPJO in infants. Market release of new systems, further miniaturization of instruments, and more affordable costs will hopefully be shedding light on more complex applications.Patient summary: Infants (≤12 mo of age) diagnosed with ureteropelvic junction obstruction undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were selected and included in this study. No intraoperative complications or conversion to an open approach occurred. Seven patients (16%) developed postoperative complications—one (2%) postoperative ileus, four (9%) urinary tract infections, and two (4.5%) port-site hernias. At a median follow-up of 19 (7–66) mo, the success rate was 100%. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Ureteropelvic junction | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Ureteropelvic junction obstruction | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Robotic pyeloplasty | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Anderson-Hynes | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Infants | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Hydronephrosis | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Rodríguez, Veronica M. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Galansky, Logan |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gundeti, Mohan S. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t European urology |d Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1976 |g 80, Seite 621-631 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)300191596 |w (DE-600)1482253-2 |w (DE-576)099718103 |x 1873-7560 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:80 |g pages:621-631 |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ELV | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_32 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_90 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_100 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_101 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_224 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_370 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_702 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2001 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2004 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2006 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2010 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2011 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2015 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2020 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2021 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2025 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2026 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2027 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2031 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2034 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2038 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2044 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2048 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2049 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2050 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2056 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2059 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2061 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2064 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2065 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2068 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2088 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2106 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2110 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2112 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2113 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2118 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2122 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2129 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2143 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2147 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2148 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2152 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2153 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2190 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2232 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2336 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2470 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2507 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2522 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2548 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4035 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4046 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4242 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4251 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4326 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4333 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4334 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4335 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4393 | ||
| 936 | b | k | |a 44.88 |j Urologie |j Nephrologie |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 80 |h 621-631 | ||
| author_variant |
c a ca v m r vm vmr l g lg m s g ms msg |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:18737560:2021----::natooasselprsoipeolsyucmstsnlisiuinn |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2021 |
| bklnumber |
44.88 |
| publishDate |
2021 |
| allfields |
10.1016/j.eururo.2021.06.019 doi (DE-627)ELV006778577 (ELSEVIER)S0302-2838(21)01860-1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 DE-600 44.88 bkl Andolfi, Ciro verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-1844-377X aut Infant Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Outcomes at a Single Institution, and Tips for Safety and Success 2021 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background: Since its first description, multiple reports proved efficacy and safety of the robotic platform. Further progress has been made allowing for the application of robotic surgery to smaller patients, including infants. Despite the early favorable results, the use of robot surgery in infants is still controversial and more studies are needed to confirm its benefits.Objective: To our knowledge, we present the largest single-institution case series of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RAL-P) in infants, aiming to contribute to the current literature with a guide for key technical steps and safety tips for infant RAL-P.Design, setting, and participants: We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board.Surgical procedure: Only infants (≤12 mo of age) with a diagnosis of congenital ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were included in the study.Measurements: We critically reviewed the clinical outcomes, described the main steps of the operation, and shared tips for a safe approach.Results and limitations: From January 2012 to August 2019, 44 infants underwent RAL-P for UPJO––33 (75%) males and 11 (25%) females. All robotic cases were completed successfully, with no laparotomic conversions. The median age and weight were 4 (1–12) mo and 6.8 (3.8–10.5) kg, respectively. The mean operative time was 142 (±25) min. The mean estimated blood loss was 7 (±3.6) ml, and no intraoperative complications occurred. The mean length of hospital stay (LOS) was 1.4 (±0.7) d. Seven (15.6%) patients had postoperative complications—one (2%) ileus (Clavien-Dindo grade [CDG] I), four (9%) urinary tract infections (CDG II), and two (4.5%) port-site hernias (CDG III). At a median follow-up of 19 mo, the success rate was 100%.Conclusions: Given the successful outcomes, benefits of decreased LOS, and improved cosmesis, RAL-P is an appealing management option for UPJO in infants. Market release of new systems, further miniaturization of instruments, and more affordable costs will hopefully be shedding light on more complex applications.Patient summary: Infants (≤12 mo of age) diagnosed with ureteropelvic junction obstruction undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were selected and included in this study. No intraoperative complications or conversion to an open approach occurred. Seven patients (16%) developed postoperative complications—one (2%) postoperative ileus, four (9%) urinary tract infections, and two (4.5%) port-site hernias. At a median follow-up of 19 (7–66) mo, the success rate was 100%. Ureteropelvic junction Ureteropelvic junction obstruction Robotic pyeloplasty Anderson-Hynes Infants Hydronephrosis Rodríguez, Veronica M. verfasserin aut Galansky, Logan verfasserin aut Gundeti, Mohan S. verfasserin aut Enthalten in European urology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1976 80, Seite 621-631 Online-Ressource (DE-627)300191596 (DE-600)1482253-2 (DE-576)099718103 1873-7560 nnns volume:80 pages:621-631 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 44.88 Urologie Nephrologie AR 80 621-631 |
| spelling |
10.1016/j.eururo.2021.06.019 doi (DE-627)ELV006778577 (ELSEVIER)S0302-2838(21)01860-1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 DE-600 44.88 bkl Andolfi, Ciro verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-1844-377X aut Infant Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Outcomes at a Single Institution, and Tips for Safety and Success 2021 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background: Since its first description, multiple reports proved efficacy and safety of the robotic platform. Further progress has been made allowing for the application of robotic surgery to smaller patients, including infants. Despite the early favorable results, the use of robot surgery in infants is still controversial and more studies are needed to confirm its benefits.Objective: To our knowledge, we present the largest single-institution case series of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RAL-P) in infants, aiming to contribute to the current literature with a guide for key technical steps and safety tips for infant RAL-P.Design, setting, and participants: We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board.Surgical procedure: Only infants (≤12 mo of age) with a diagnosis of congenital ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were included in the study.Measurements: We critically reviewed the clinical outcomes, described the main steps of the operation, and shared tips for a safe approach.Results and limitations: From January 2012 to August 2019, 44 infants underwent RAL-P for UPJO––33 (75%) males and 11 (25%) females. All robotic cases were completed successfully, with no laparotomic conversions. The median age and weight were 4 (1–12) mo and 6.8 (3.8–10.5) kg, respectively. The mean operative time was 142 (±25) min. The mean estimated blood loss was 7 (±3.6) ml, and no intraoperative complications occurred. The mean length of hospital stay (LOS) was 1.4 (±0.7) d. Seven (15.6%) patients had postoperative complications—one (2%) ileus (Clavien-Dindo grade [CDG] I), four (9%) urinary tract infections (CDG II), and two (4.5%) port-site hernias (CDG III). At a median follow-up of 19 mo, the success rate was 100%.Conclusions: Given the successful outcomes, benefits of decreased LOS, and improved cosmesis, RAL-P is an appealing management option for UPJO in infants. Market release of new systems, further miniaturization of instruments, and more affordable costs will hopefully be shedding light on more complex applications.Patient summary: Infants (≤12 mo of age) diagnosed with ureteropelvic junction obstruction undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were selected and included in this study. No intraoperative complications or conversion to an open approach occurred. Seven patients (16%) developed postoperative complications—one (2%) postoperative ileus, four (9%) urinary tract infections, and two (4.5%) port-site hernias. At a median follow-up of 19 (7–66) mo, the success rate was 100%. Ureteropelvic junction Ureteropelvic junction obstruction Robotic pyeloplasty Anderson-Hynes Infants Hydronephrosis Rodríguez, Veronica M. verfasserin aut Galansky, Logan verfasserin aut Gundeti, Mohan S. verfasserin aut Enthalten in European urology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1976 80, Seite 621-631 Online-Ressource (DE-627)300191596 (DE-600)1482253-2 (DE-576)099718103 1873-7560 nnns volume:80 pages:621-631 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 44.88 Urologie Nephrologie AR 80 621-631 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1016/j.eururo.2021.06.019 doi (DE-627)ELV006778577 (ELSEVIER)S0302-2838(21)01860-1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 DE-600 44.88 bkl Andolfi, Ciro verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-1844-377X aut Infant Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Outcomes at a Single Institution, and Tips for Safety and Success 2021 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background: Since its first description, multiple reports proved efficacy and safety of the robotic platform. Further progress has been made allowing for the application of robotic surgery to smaller patients, including infants. Despite the early favorable results, the use of robot surgery in infants is still controversial and more studies are needed to confirm its benefits.Objective: To our knowledge, we present the largest single-institution case series of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RAL-P) in infants, aiming to contribute to the current literature with a guide for key technical steps and safety tips for infant RAL-P.Design, setting, and participants: We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board.Surgical procedure: Only infants (≤12 mo of age) with a diagnosis of congenital ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were included in the study.Measurements: We critically reviewed the clinical outcomes, described the main steps of the operation, and shared tips for a safe approach.Results and limitations: From January 2012 to August 2019, 44 infants underwent RAL-P for UPJO––33 (75%) males and 11 (25%) females. All robotic cases were completed successfully, with no laparotomic conversions. The median age and weight were 4 (1–12) mo and 6.8 (3.8–10.5) kg, respectively. The mean operative time was 142 (±25) min. The mean estimated blood loss was 7 (±3.6) ml, and no intraoperative complications occurred. The mean length of hospital stay (LOS) was 1.4 (±0.7) d. Seven (15.6%) patients had postoperative complications—one (2%) ileus (Clavien-Dindo grade [CDG] I), four (9%) urinary tract infections (CDG II), and two (4.5%) port-site hernias (CDG III). At a median follow-up of 19 mo, the success rate was 100%.Conclusions: Given the successful outcomes, benefits of decreased LOS, and improved cosmesis, RAL-P is an appealing management option for UPJO in infants. Market release of new systems, further miniaturization of instruments, and more affordable costs will hopefully be shedding light on more complex applications.Patient summary: Infants (≤12 mo of age) diagnosed with ureteropelvic junction obstruction undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were selected and included in this study. No intraoperative complications or conversion to an open approach occurred. Seven patients (16%) developed postoperative complications—one (2%) postoperative ileus, four (9%) urinary tract infections, and two (4.5%) port-site hernias. At a median follow-up of 19 (7–66) mo, the success rate was 100%. Ureteropelvic junction Ureteropelvic junction obstruction Robotic pyeloplasty Anderson-Hynes Infants Hydronephrosis Rodríguez, Veronica M. verfasserin aut Galansky, Logan verfasserin aut Gundeti, Mohan S. verfasserin aut Enthalten in European urology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1976 80, Seite 621-631 Online-Ressource (DE-627)300191596 (DE-600)1482253-2 (DE-576)099718103 1873-7560 nnns volume:80 pages:621-631 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 44.88 Urologie Nephrologie AR 80 621-631 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1016/j.eururo.2021.06.019 doi (DE-627)ELV006778577 (ELSEVIER)S0302-2838(21)01860-1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 DE-600 44.88 bkl Andolfi, Ciro verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-1844-377X aut Infant Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Outcomes at a Single Institution, and Tips for Safety and Success 2021 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background: Since its first description, multiple reports proved efficacy and safety of the robotic platform. Further progress has been made allowing for the application of robotic surgery to smaller patients, including infants. Despite the early favorable results, the use of robot surgery in infants is still controversial and more studies are needed to confirm its benefits.Objective: To our knowledge, we present the largest single-institution case series of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RAL-P) in infants, aiming to contribute to the current literature with a guide for key technical steps and safety tips for infant RAL-P.Design, setting, and participants: We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board.Surgical procedure: Only infants (≤12 mo of age) with a diagnosis of congenital ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were included in the study.Measurements: We critically reviewed the clinical outcomes, described the main steps of the operation, and shared tips for a safe approach.Results and limitations: From January 2012 to August 2019, 44 infants underwent RAL-P for UPJO––33 (75%) males and 11 (25%) females. All robotic cases were completed successfully, with no laparotomic conversions. The median age and weight were 4 (1–12) mo and 6.8 (3.8–10.5) kg, respectively. The mean operative time was 142 (±25) min. The mean estimated blood loss was 7 (±3.6) ml, and no intraoperative complications occurred. The mean length of hospital stay (LOS) was 1.4 (±0.7) d. Seven (15.6%) patients had postoperative complications—one (2%) ileus (Clavien-Dindo grade [CDG] I), four (9%) urinary tract infections (CDG II), and two (4.5%) port-site hernias (CDG III). At a median follow-up of 19 mo, the success rate was 100%.Conclusions: Given the successful outcomes, benefits of decreased LOS, and improved cosmesis, RAL-P is an appealing management option for UPJO in infants. Market release of new systems, further miniaturization of instruments, and more affordable costs will hopefully be shedding light on more complex applications.Patient summary: Infants (≤12 mo of age) diagnosed with ureteropelvic junction obstruction undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were selected and included in this study. No intraoperative complications or conversion to an open approach occurred. Seven patients (16%) developed postoperative complications—one (2%) postoperative ileus, four (9%) urinary tract infections, and two (4.5%) port-site hernias. At a median follow-up of 19 (7–66) mo, the success rate was 100%. Ureteropelvic junction Ureteropelvic junction obstruction Robotic pyeloplasty Anderson-Hynes Infants Hydronephrosis Rodríguez, Veronica M. verfasserin aut Galansky, Logan verfasserin aut Gundeti, Mohan S. verfasserin aut Enthalten in European urology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1976 80, Seite 621-631 Online-Ressource (DE-627)300191596 (DE-600)1482253-2 (DE-576)099718103 1873-7560 nnns volume:80 pages:621-631 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 44.88 Urologie Nephrologie AR 80 621-631 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1016/j.eururo.2021.06.019 doi (DE-627)ELV006778577 (ELSEVIER)S0302-2838(21)01860-1 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 DE-600 44.88 bkl Andolfi, Ciro verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-1844-377X aut Infant Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Outcomes at a Single Institution, and Tips for Safety and Success 2021 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background: Since its first description, multiple reports proved efficacy and safety of the robotic platform. Further progress has been made allowing for the application of robotic surgery to smaller patients, including infants. Despite the early favorable results, the use of robot surgery in infants is still controversial and more studies are needed to confirm its benefits.Objective: To our knowledge, we present the largest single-institution case series of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RAL-P) in infants, aiming to contribute to the current literature with a guide for key technical steps and safety tips for infant RAL-P.Design, setting, and participants: We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board.Surgical procedure: Only infants (≤12 mo of age) with a diagnosis of congenital ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were included in the study.Measurements: We critically reviewed the clinical outcomes, described the main steps of the operation, and shared tips for a safe approach.Results and limitations: From January 2012 to August 2019, 44 infants underwent RAL-P for UPJO––33 (75%) males and 11 (25%) females. All robotic cases were completed successfully, with no laparotomic conversions. The median age and weight were 4 (1–12) mo and 6.8 (3.8–10.5) kg, respectively. The mean operative time was 142 (±25) min. The mean estimated blood loss was 7 (±3.6) ml, and no intraoperative complications occurred. The mean length of hospital stay (LOS) was 1.4 (±0.7) d. Seven (15.6%) patients had postoperative complications—one (2%) ileus (Clavien-Dindo grade [CDG] I), four (9%) urinary tract infections (CDG II), and two (4.5%) port-site hernias (CDG III). At a median follow-up of 19 mo, the success rate was 100%.Conclusions: Given the successful outcomes, benefits of decreased LOS, and improved cosmesis, RAL-P is an appealing management option for UPJO in infants. Market release of new systems, further miniaturization of instruments, and more affordable costs will hopefully be shedding light on more complex applications.Patient summary: Infants (≤12 mo of age) diagnosed with ureteropelvic junction obstruction undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were selected and included in this study. No intraoperative complications or conversion to an open approach occurred. Seven patients (16%) developed postoperative complications—one (2%) postoperative ileus, four (9%) urinary tract infections, and two (4.5%) port-site hernias. At a median follow-up of 19 (7–66) mo, the success rate was 100%. Ureteropelvic junction Ureteropelvic junction obstruction Robotic pyeloplasty Anderson-Hynes Infants Hydronephrosis Rodríguez, Veronica M. verfasserin aut Galansky, Logan verfasserin aut Gundeti, Mohan S. verfasserin aut Enthalten in European urology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1976 80, Seite 621-631 Online-Ressource (DE-627)300191596 (DE-600)1482253-2 (DE-576)099718103 1873-7560 nnns volume:80 pages:621-631 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 44.88 Urologie Nephrologie AR 80 621-631 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in European urology 80, Seite 621-631 volume:80 pages:621-631 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in European urology 80, Seite 621-631 volume:80 pages:621-631 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| bklname |
Urologie Nephrologie |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Ureteropelvic junction Ureteropelvic junction obstruction Robotic pyeloplasty Anderson-Hynes Infants Hydronephrosis |
| dewey-raw |
610 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
European urology |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Andolfi, Ciro @@aut@@ Rodríguez, Veronica M. @@aut@@ Galansky, Logan @@aut@@ Gundeti, Mohan S. @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2021-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
300191596 |
| dewey-sort |
3610 |
| id |
ELV006778577 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV006778577</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230524162041.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230506s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.eururo.2021.06.019</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV006778577</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0302-2838(21)01860-1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.88</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Andolfi, Ciro</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0002-1844-377X</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Infant Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Outcomes at a Single Institution, and Tips for Safety and Success</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background: Since its first description, multiple reports proved efficacy and safety of the robotic platform. Further progress has been made allowing for the application of robotic surgery to smaller patients, including infants. Despite the early favorable results, the use of robot surgery in infants is still controversial and more studies are needed to confirm its benefits.Objective: To our knowledge, we present the largest single-institution case series of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RAL-P) in infants, aiming to contribute to the current literature with a guide for key technical steps and safety tips for infant RAL-P.Design, setting, and participants: We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board.Surgical procedure: Only infants (≤12 mo of age) with a diagnosis of congenital ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were included in the study.Measurements: We critically reviewed the clinical outcomes, described the main steps of the operation, and shared tips for a safe approach.Results and limitations: From January 2012 to August 2019, 44 infants underwent RAL-P for UPJO––33 (75%) males and 11 (25%) females. All robotic cases were completed successfully, with no laparotomic conversions. The median age and weight were 4 (1–12) mo and 6.8 (3.8–10.5) kg, respectively. The mean operative time was 142 (±25) min. The mean estimated blood loss was 7 (±3.6) ml, and no intraoperative complications occurred. The mean length of hospital stay (LOS) was 1.4 (±0.7) d. Seven (15.6%) patients had postoperative complications—one (2%) ileus (Clavien-Dindo grade [CDG] I), four (9%) urinary tract infections (CDG II), and two (4.5%) port-site hernias (CDG III). At a median follow-up of 19 mo, the success rate was 100%.Conclusions: Given the successful outcomes, benefits of decreased LOS, and improved cosmesis, RAL-P is an appealing management option for UPJO in infants. Market release of new systems, further miniaturization of instruments, and more affordable costs will hopefully be shedding light on more complex applications.Patient summary: Infants (≤12 mo of age) diagnosed with ureteropelvic junction obstruction undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were selected and included in this study. No intraoperative complications or conversion to an open approach occurred. Seven patients (16%) developed postoperative complications—one (2%) postoperative ileus, four (9%) urinary tract infections, and two (4.5%) port-site hernias. At a median follow-up of 19 (7–66) mo, the success rate was 100%.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ureteropelvic junction</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ureteropelvic junction obstruction</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Robotic pyeloplasty</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Anderson-Hynes</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Infants</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Hydronephrosis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Rodríguez, Veronica M.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Galansky, Logan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gundeti, Mohan S.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">European urology</subfield><subfield code="d">Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1976</subfield><subfield code="g">80, Seite 621-631</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)300191596</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1482253-2</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)099718103</subfield><subfield code="x">1873-7560</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:80</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:621-631</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2031</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2548</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.88</subfield><subfield code="j">Urologie</subfield><subfield code="j">Nephrologie</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">80</subfield><subfield code="h">621-631</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Andolfi, Ciro |
| spellingShingle |
Andolfi, Ciro ddc 610 bkl 44.88 misc Ureteropelvic junction misc Ureteropelvic junction obstruction misc Robotic pyeloplasty misc Anderson-Hynes misc Infants misc Hydronephrosis Infant Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Outcomes at a Single Institution, and Tips for Safety and Success |
| authorStr |
Andolfi, Ciro |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)300191596 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| dewey-ones |
610 - Medicine & health |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut aut |
| collection |
elsevier |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1873-7560 |
| topic_title |
610 DE-600 44.88 bkl Infant Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Outcomes at a Single Institution, and Tips for Safety and Success Ureteropelvic junction Ureteropelvic junction obstruction Robotic pyeloplasty Anderson-Hynes Infants Hydronephrosis |
| topic |
ddc 610 bkl 44.88 misc Ureteropelvic junction misc Ureteropelvic junction obstruction misc Robotic pyeloplasty misc Anderson-Hynes misc Infants misc Hydronephrosis |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 610 bkl 44.88 misc Ureteropelvic junction misc Ureteropelvic junction obstruction misc Robotic pyeloplasty misc Anderson-Hynes misc Infants misc Hydronephrosis |
| topic_browse |
ddc 610 bkl 44.88 misc Ureteropelvic junction misc Ureteropelvic junction obstruction misc Robotic pyeloplasty misc Anderson-Hynes misc Infants misc Hydronephrosis |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
European urology |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
300191596 |
| dewey-tens |
610 - Medicine & health |
| hierarchy_top_title |
European urology |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)300191596 (DE-600)1482253-2 (DE-576)099718103 |
| title |
Infant Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Outcomes at a Single Institution, and Tips for Safety and Success |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)ELV006778577 (ELSEVIER)S0302-2838(21)01860-1 |
| title_full |
Infant Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Outcomes at a Single Institution, and Tips for Safety and Success |
| author_sort |
Andolfi, Ciro |
| journal |
European urology |
| journalStr |
European urology |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2021 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
621 |
| author_browse |
Andolfi, Ciro Rodríguez, Veronica M. Galansky, Logan Gundeti, Mohan S. |
| container_volume |
80 |
| class |
610 DE-600 44.88 bkl |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Andolfi, Ciro |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1016/j.eururo.2021.06.019 |
| normlink |
(ORCID)0000-0002-1844-377X |
| normlink_prefix_str_mv |
(orcid)0000-0002-1844-377X |
| dewey-full |
610 |
| author2-role |
verfasserin |
| title_sort |
infant robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty: outcomes at a single institution, and tips for safety and success |
| title_auth |
Infant Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Outcomes at a Single Institution, and Tips for Safety and Success |
| abstract |
Background: Since its first description, multiple reports proved efficacy and safety of the robotic platform. Further progress has been made allowing for the application of robotic surgery to smaller patients, including infants. Despite the early favorable results, the use of robot surgery in infants is still controversial and more studies are needed to confirm its benefits.Objective: To our knowledge, we present the largest single-institution case series of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RAL-P) in infants, aiming to contribute to the current literature with a guide for key technical steps and safety tips for infant RAL-P.Design, setting, and participants: We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board.Surgical procedure: Only infants (≤12 mo of age) with a diagnosis of congenital ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were included in the study.Measurements: We critically reviewed the clinical outcomes, described the main steps of the operation, and shared tips for a safe approach.Results and limitations: From January 2012 to August 2019, 44 infants underwent RAL-P for UPJO––33 (75%) males and 11 (25%) females. All robotic cases were completed successfully, with no laparotomic conversions. The median age and weight were 4 (1–12) mo and 6.8 (3.8–10.5) kg, respectively. The mean operative time was 142 (±25) min. The mean estimated blood loss was 7 (±3.6) ml, and no intraoperative complications occurred. The mean length of hospital stay (LOS) was 1.4 (±0.7) d. Seven (15.6%) patients had postoperative complications—one (2%) ileus (Clavien-Dindo grade [CDG] I), four (9%) urinary tract infections (CDG II), and two (4.5%) port-site hernias (CDG III). At a median follow-up of 19 mo, the success rate was 100%.Conclusions: Given the successful outcomes, benefits of decreased LOS, and improved cosmesis, RAL-P is an appealing management option for UPJO in infants. Market release of new systems, further miniaturization of instruments, and more affordable costs will hopefully be shedding light on more complex applications.Patient summary: Infants (≤12 mo of age) diagnosed with ureteropelvic junction obstruction undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were selected and included in this study. No intraoperative complications or conversion to an open approach occurred. Seven patients (16%) developed postoperative complications—one (2%) postoperative ileus, four (9%) urinary tract infections, and two (4.5%) port-site hernias. At a median follow-up of 19 (7–66) mo, the success rate was 100%. |
| abstractGer |
Background: Since its first description, multiple reports proved efficacy and safety of the robotic platform. Further progress has been made allowing for the application of robotic surgery to smaller patients, including infants. Despite the early favorable results, the use of robot surgery in infants is still controversial and more studies are needed to confirm its benefits.Objective: To our knowledge, we present the largest single-institution case series of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RAL-P) in infants, aiming to contribute to the current literature with a guide for key technical steps and safety tips for infant RAL-P.Design, setting, and participants: We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board.Surgical procedure: Only infants (≤12 mo of age) with a diagnosis of congenital ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were included in the study.Measurements: We critically reviewed the clinical outcomes, described the main steps of the operation, and shared tips for a safe approach.Results and limitations: From January 2012 to August 2019, 44 infants underwent RAL-P for UPJO––33 (75%) males and 11 (25%) females. All robotic cases were completed successfully, with no laparotomic conversions. The median age and weight were 4 (1–12) mo and 6.8 (3.8–10.5) kg, respectively. The mean operative time was 142 (±25) min. The mean estimated blood loss was 7 (±3.6) ml, and no intraoperative complications occurred. The mean length of hospital stay (LOS) was 1.4 (±0.7) d. Seven (15.6%) patients had postoperative complications—one (2%) ileus (Clavien-Dindo grade [CDG] I), four (9%) urinary tract infections (CDG II), and two (4.5%) port-site hernias (CDG III). At a median follow-up of 19 mo, the success rate was 100%.Conclusions: Given the successful outcomes, benefits of decreased LOS, and improved cosmesis, RAL-P is an appealing management option for UPJO in infants. Market release of new systems, further miniaturization of instruments, and more affordable costs will hopefully be shedding light on more complex applications.Patient summary: Infants (≤12 mo of age) diagnosed with ureteropelvic junction obstruction undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were selected and included in this study. No intraoperative complications or conversion to an open approach occurred. Seven patients (16%) developed postoperative complications—one (2%) postoperative ileus, four (9%) urinary tract infections, and two (4.5%) port-site hernias. At a median follow-up of 19 (7–66) mo, the success rate was 100%. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Background: Since its first description, multiple reports proved efficacy and safety of the robotic platform. Further progress has been made allowing for the application of robotic surgery to smaller patients, including infants. Despite the early favorable results, the use of robot surgery in infants is still controversial and more studies are needed to confirm its benefits.Objective: To our knowledge, we present the largest single-institution case series of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RAL-P) in infants, aiming to contribute to the current literature with a guide for key technical steps and safety tips for infant RAL-P.Design, setting, and participants: We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board.Surgical procedure: Only infants (≤12 mo of age) with a diagnosis of congenital ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were included in the study.Measurements: We critically reviewed the clinical outcomes, described the main steps of the operation, and shared tips for a safe approach.Results and limitations: From January 2012 to August 2019, 44 infants underwent RAL-P for UPJO––33 (75%) males and 11 (25%) females. All robotic cases were completed successfully, with no laparotomic conversions. The median age and weight were 4 (1–12) mo and 6.8 (3.8–10.5) kg, respectively. The mean operative time was 142 (±25) min. The mean estimated blood loss was 7 (±3.6) ml, and no intraoperative complications occurred. The mean length of hospital stay (LOS) was 1.4 (±0.7) d. Seven (15.6%) patients had postoperative complications—one (2%) ileus (Clavien-Dindo grade [CDG] I), four (9%) urinary tract infections (CDG II), and two (4.5%) port-site hernias (CDG III). At a median follow-up of 19 mo, the success rate was 100%.Conclusions: Given the successful outcomes, benefits of decreased LOS, and improved cosmesis, RAL-P is an appealing management option for UPJO in infants. Market release of new systems, further miniaturization of instruments, and more affordable costs will hopefully be shedding light on more complex applications.Patient summary: Infants (≤12 mo of age) diagnosed with ureteropelvic junction obstruction undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were selected and included in this study. No intraoperative complications or conversion to an open approach occurred. Seven patients (16%) developed postoperative complications—one (2%) postoperative ileus, four (9%) urinary tract infections, and two (4.5%) port-site hernias. At a median follow-up of 19 (7–66) mo, the success rate was 100%. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 |
| title_short |
Infant Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Outcomes at a Single Institution, and Tips for Safety and Success |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Rodríguez, Veronica M. Galansky, Logan Gundeti, Mohan S. |
| author2Str |
Rodríguez, Veronica M. Galansky, Logan Gundeti, Mohan S. |
| ppnlink |
300191596 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
c |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1016/j.eururo.2021.06.019 |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T22:31:55.428Z |
| _version_ |
1803870656716079104 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV006778577</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230524162041.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230506s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.eururo.2021.06.019</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV006778577</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0302-2838(21)01860-1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.88</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Andolfi, Ciro</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0002-1844-377X</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Infant Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Outcomes at a Single Institution, and Tips for Safety and Success</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background: Since its first description, multiple reports proved efficacy and safety of the robotic platform. Further progress has been made allowing for the application of robotic surgery to smaller patients, including infants. Despite the early favorable results, the use of robot surgery in infants is still controversial and more studies are needed to confirm its benefits.Objective: To our knowledge, we present the largest single-institution case series of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RAL-P) in infants, aiming to contribute to the current literature with a guide for key technical steps and safety tips for infant RAL-P.Design, setting, and participants: We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board.Surgical procedure: Only infants (≤12 mo of age) with a diagnosis of congenital ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were included in the study.Measurements: We critically reviewed the clinical outcomes, described the main steps of the operation, and shared tips for a safe approach.Results and limitations: From January 2012 to August 2019, 44 infants underwent RAL-P for UPJO––33 (75%) males and 11 (25%) females. All robotic cases were completed successfully, with no laparotomic conversions. The median age and weight were 4 (1–12) mo and 6.8 (3.8–10.5) kg, respectively. The mean operative time was 142 (±25) min. The mean estimated blood loss was 7 (±3.6) ml, and no intraoperative complications occurred. The mean length of hospital stay (LOS) was 1.4 (±0.7) d. Seven (15.6%) patients had postoperative complications—one (2%) ileus (Clavien-Dindo grade [CDG] I), four (9%) urinary tract infections (CDG II), and two (4.5%) port-site hernias (CDG III). At a median follow-up of 19 mo, the success rate was 100%.Conclusions: Given the successful outcomes, benefits of decreased LOS, and improved cosmesis, RAL-P is an appealing management option for UPJO in infants. Market release of new systems, further miniaturization of instruments, and more affordable costs will hopefully be shedding light on more complex applications.Patient summary: Infants (≤12 mo of age) diagnosed with ureteropelvic junction obstruction undergoing primary robotic dismembered pyeloplasty were selected and included in this study. No intraoperative complications or conversion to an open approach occurred. Seven patients (16%) developed postoperative complications—one (2%) postoperative ileus, four (9%) urinary tract infections, and two (4.5%) port-site hernias. At a median follow-up of 19 (7–66) mo, the success rate was 100%.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ureteropelvic junction</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ureteropelvic junction obstruction</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Robotic pyeloplasty</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Anderson-Hynes</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Infants</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Hydronephrosis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Rodríguez, Veronica M.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Galansky, Logan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gundeti, Mohan S.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">European urology</subfield><subfield code="d">Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1976</subfield><subfield code="g">80, Seite 621-631</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)300191596</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1482253-2</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)099718103</subfield><subfield code="x">1873-7560</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:80</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:621-631</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2031</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2548</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.88</subfield><subfield code="j">Urologie</subfield><subfield code="j">Nephrologie</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">80</subfield><subfield code="h">621-631</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.3984013 |