title: Failed pyeloplasty in children: Is robot-assisted laparoscopic reoperative repair feasible?
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  In this study we aim to demonstrate that robot-assisted laparoscopic (RAL) reoperative repair is safe and effective and even less technically demanding than open repair for recurrent ureteropelvic-junction obstruction (UPJO).
  
  
  METHODS
  A retrospective study was conducted of all cases of failed open pyeloplasties who underwent RAL reoperative repair at our institution between January 2010 and December 2013. The general surgical procedure was the same we previously described for robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Success was defined as: improvement in the degree of hydronephrosis at ultrasound, improvement of diuretic washout time at postoperative diuretic renogram (<15 min), improvement or at least stable differential renal function and absence of symptoms. These radiographic and symptomatic criteria of success were considered the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included complications and length of hospital stay.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Between 2000 and 2013 a total of 153 patients underwent open Anderson-Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty. Of these 9 (6%) had recurrent UPJO. Four patients underwent open redo pyeloplasty. As a result, our study population comprised 5 children who underwent reoperative RALP repair. Patient characteristics and outcomes are summarized in the table below. Our success rate was 100%.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Due to the low failure rate of open dismembered pyeloplasty there is no consensus on the best surgical approach for recurrent obstruction. While endoscopic approaches have been favored in adults, children have shown better success rates with repeat pyeloplasty. Laparoscopic salvage pyeloplasty for failed open procedures has become more popular and has been shown to result in excellent outcomes while providing the advantages of minimally invasive surgery. To date, the literature regarding the use of RALP for failed open procedures in the pediatric population is scarce. Only 2 pediatric series of robotic reoperative pyeloplasty have been reported by Helmal et al. (9 patients) and Lindgren et al. (16 patients) with a success rate of 100 and 88%, respectively. Although this is one of the first published studies about robot-assisted laparoscopic reoperative repair for failed open pyeloplasty in pediatric patients, we acknowledge the limitations of our study due to the small number of patients, its retrospective nature and limited follow-up time.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The incidence of failed open pyeloplasty is as low as 5% and management remains controversial. As reported by other authors, we believe that crossing vessels play a particularly important role in secondary obstruction and adversely impact the outcome. Redo pyeloplasty, open or minimally invasive, is associated with high success rates (80-100%) and therefore considered the treatment of choice by the majority of authors nowadays. Additionally, RALP for secondary procedures has demonstrated to be safe and even less technically demanding when compared to the open approach, providing the advantages of minimally invasive surgery.
authors: Pediatric Urology Group, Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain; Department of Pediatric Surgery, Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain.
authors: Marino
authors: M
authors: Asensio
authors: Pediatric Urology Group, Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain; Department of Pediatric Surgery, Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: romygander@gmail.com.
authors: Romy
authors: R
authors: Gander
authors: Pediatric Urology Group, Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain; Department of Pediatric Surgery, Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain.
authors: Gloria F
authors: GF
authors: Royo
authors: Department of Pediatric Surgery, Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain.
authors: Josep
authors: J
authors: Lloret
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D002648:Child; D015331:Cohort Studies; D003251:Constriction, Pathologic / Q000601:surgery; D005240:Feasibility Studies; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D007682:Kidney Pelvis / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery*; D008297:Male; D019060:Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures / Q000379:methods; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000601:surgery; D012086:Reoperation / Q000379:methods; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D018570:Risk Assessment; D065287:Robotic Surgical Procedures / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*; D013997:Time Factors; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014517:Ureteral Obstruction / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000601:surgery*; D013520:Urologic Surgical Procedures / Q000009:adverse effects* / Q000379:methods
keywords: Blood vessels; Pediatrics; Robotic; Ureteral obstruction