[Pyeloplasty: aesthetic benefit of lumboscopy].
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the aesthetic benefit of lumboscopy versus lumbotomy in a group of patients undergoing pyeloplasty.


METHODS
A telephone survey was conducted in 103 people operated by pyeloplasty via lumboscopy or lumbotomy. The questions concerned the appearance of the scar (size, relief; visible or invisible), skin complications, satisfaction with the scar, postoperative pain, length of hospital stay and return to physical activity or work.


RESULTS
The response rate was 58.2% corresponding to 32 lumboscopies and 29 lumbotomies. Lumboscopy scars were shorter (2.7 vs 15.6 cm for lumbotomies, p<0.001). Lumbotomy scars were palpable in 75% of cases versus 53.1% of lumboscopy scars of (p=0.037). Almost 96.5% of lumbotomy scars were visible versus only 68.7% of lumboscopy scars (p=0.0057). Lumbotomies were complicated by incisional hernia in 14.2% of cases, while no incisional hernias were observed in the lumboscopy group (p=0.02). 85% of patients were satisfied with their scars in the lumboscopy group versus 56% of patients operated by lumbotomy (p=0.0286).


CONCLUSIONS
This study showed a statistically significant difference in terms of a purely aesthetic benefit and scar solidity in favour of lumboscopy, which supports the growing place of this surgical technique in urology.
Service d'Urologie, CHU de Rouen, France. karimferhi@yahoo.fr
Karim
K
Ferhi
Kahina
K
Oussedik
Olivier
O
Cappele
Naoufel
N
Miaadi
Emmanuel
E
Goulet
Philippe
P
Grise
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007682:Kidney Pelvis / Q000601:surgery*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D014517:Ureteral Obstruction / Q000601:surgery*; D018666:Ureteroscopy / Q000379:methods