Reoperative robotic pyeloplasty in children

T. D. Davis, Amy Burns, S. T. Corbett, C. A. Peters

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

35 Scopus citations


Introduction Reoperative pyeloplasty for recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) can be technically challenging and is associated with greater morbidity and lower success rates than an initial repair. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) previously has been demonstrated to be a safe and effective approach for management of recurrent UPJO; however, the length of follow-up has been limited. The objective of this study was to confirm the safety and efficacy of RALP for UPJO in children following failed previous pyeloplasty and provide clinical benchmarks for intermediate length follow-up in this patient population. Methods An IRB approved retrospective chart review was performed for all patients undergoing reoperative RALP from June 2006 to December 2014. All cases were performed by surgeons from two institutions for persistent UPJO following failed initial pyeloplasty. Information including demographic information, radiographic studies, and operative interventions performed between the initial repair and reoperative surgery, reoperative RALP intraoperative data, postoperative clinical course and imaging studies, and subsequent interventions following reoperative RALP were extracted. Results Twenty-three children underwent reoperative RALP. Eleven patients had right- and 12 left-sided repairs. Median age at reoperative RALP was 4.0 years and median interval between surgeries was 1.3 years. Indications for repeat repair included pain, infection, and/or radiographic evidence of worsening obstruction and/or deteriorating renal function. Mean operative time was 198 min from incision to port closure. Mean length of stay was 2.3 days. Six complications occurred in five patients within 30 days postoperatively, including ileus, pneumonia, and urinary tract infection. Median length of follow-up was 26 months (range 4–45 months) for all patients and 31 months (range 16–45 months) in 18 patients with >12 months of follow-up. More than 80% of patients presenting with flank pain prior to reoperative RALP had resolution of this symptom. To date, 78% of patients with >12 months of follow-up have not required further operative intervention. Excellent results have been achieved in 14 of 18 patients (78%) with sufficient postoperative follow-up in terms of length of follow-up (>12 months), symptom resolution, and/or improved imaging results. Conclusions RALP following previous pyeloplasty is technically feasible with acceptable operative times, lengths of stay, and complication rates. Reoperative RALP is our preferred modality for repair of recurrent UPJO with the vast majority of patients having successful outcomes based on imaging, resolution of symptoms, and the rare need for further intervention across an intermediate length follow-up period.[Table

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)394.e1-394.e7
JournalJournal of Pediatric Urology
Issue number6
StatePublished - Dec 1 2016

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
  • Urology


Dive into the research topics of 'Reoperative robotic pyeloplasty in children'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this