Comparison of endopyelotomy and laparoscopic pyeloplasty for poorly functioning kidneys with ureteropelvic junction obstruction.
Endopyelotomy and laparoscopic pyeloplasty are established procedures for ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) and historically a high failure rate has been observed in poorly functioning units with UPJ obstruction. The aim of this study is to compare the results of laparoscopic pyeloplasty with endopyelotomy in poorly functioning renal units, i.e., GFR under 25 ml/min.


METHODS
Retrospective analysis of all the patients who underwent either laparoscopic pyeloplasty or endopyelotomy for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in poorly functioning units between January 1998 and June 2005 was done. Follow-up renal scans, done at three, six, 12 months and yearly thereafter, were studied. Success was defined as symptomatic relief and/ or improvement in function (10% over baseline) in renal scan.


RESULTS
There were 23 patients in the endopyelotomy group and 15 patients in the laparoscopic pyeloplasty group with mean age of 25.3 years (9-53) and 26 years (10-44), respectively. Mean pelvic volume was 41.2 8cc +/- 9.5 and 39.1cc +/- 9.85 in the endopyelotomy group and laparoscopic pyeloplasty group, respectively. Mean preoperative GFR was 17.4 +/- 5.7 ml/min and 21 +/- 4.5 ml/min in the endopyelotomy group and laparoscopic pyeloplasty group, respectively and mean postoperative GFR was 21 +/- 3.5 ml/min and 22 +/- 3.9 ml/min, respectively. Eighteen and 11 patients were symptomatic in ethe ndopyelotomy group and laparoscopic pyeloplasty group, respectively while symptomatic improvement was seen in 14 and 11 patients, respectively. Mean follow-up was 12 months in the laparoscopy group and 28 months in the endopyelotomy group. Success rate was better for laparoscopic surgery group (15/15 = 100%) than for endopyelotomy (18/23 = 78.26%).


CONCLUSIONS
Though the improvement in renal function is less in patients with UPJO with poorly functioning kidneys undergoing endopyelotomy or laparoscopic pyeloplasty, laparoscopic pyeloplasty gives better results in the form of symptomatic relief; however, renal function remains stable whichever the approach chosen.
Singh
Pratipal
P
Department of Urology, Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, India.
Kapoor
Rakesh
R
Suri
Amit
A
Singh
Kamal Jeet
KJ
Mandhani
Anil
A
Dubey
Deepak
D
Srivastava
Aneesh
A
Kumar
Anant
A
J Urol. 1986 Jan;135(1):26-8
3941462
BJU Int. 2000 Nov;86(7):773-6
11069399
J Endourol. 2001 Sep;15(7):725-8
11697405
Br J Urol. 1984 Dec;56(6):586-8
6534471
J Urol. 1993 Dec;150(6):1795-9
8230507
J Urol. 2002 Mar;167(3):1253-6
11832708
Eur Urol. 2000 Aug;38(2):139-43
10895003
J Urol. 1992 Sep;148(3):775-82; discussion 782-3
1512824
Urology. 1995 Dec;46(6):791-5
7502417
Urology. 2004 Jul;64(1):16-21; discussion 21
15245924
J Urol. 1996 Oct;156(4):1411
8808883
J Urol. 2002 Nov;168(5):1937-40; discussion 1940
12394680
Eur Urol. 2006 Mar;49(3):536-42; discussion 542-3
16457941
Urology. 2005 Nov;66(5 Suppl):47-51
16194707
J Urol. 1988 Sep;140(3):476-8
3411654
Urol Clin North Am. 1998 May;25(2):281-8
9633582
J Urol. 1998 Jan;159(1):56-61
9400436
Urology. 2004 Feb;63(2):230-4
14972459
J Urol. 1994 Apr;151(4):934-7
8126829