Purpose: to compare the efficacy of laparoscopic vs open pyeloplasty.
Nowadays laparoscopy became an essential part of surgery. In order to minimize the invasiveness but with preservation of efficacy of surgical intervention, likewise in urology laparoscopic surgery is wide-spread now. Ir our clinic we perform either laparoscopic or open methods of pyeloplasty and we had an opportunity to compare the efficacy and safety of them.
The cases of 20 patients were divided into 2 groups: in the first group 10 patients that underwent open pyeloplasty and the second group of 10 patients underwent laparoscopic pyeloplasty. There were 4 female and 6 male patients in first group. There were 7 female and 3 male patients in second group.
Duration of surgery in patients of first group was 209±48.78 min, whereas in the second group 200 ±55.15 min. Duration of postoperative stay in first group was 24.3 days, whereas in second group – 12 days. In first group patients became active on 3-4 postoperative days, whereas in second group just on the next day after the surgery. Postoperative pain last in first group 8± 7 days, whereas in second group 5±1.58 days. Duration of time need for rehabilitation in first group was more than 1 month and within this period they were limited for physical activities, including their work. But in second group patients returned to their daily life and work soon after the discharge.
All patients were under the examination for 3 months and in all cases no signs of obstruction of UPJ were detected.
Laparoscopic pyeloplasty is preferable in contrast to open approach, because of its high efficacy, minimal invasiveness, quick rehabilitation time and cosmetic results.
Considering our experience, positive results in early and late postoperative period, we prefer laparoscopic method of pyeloplasty in patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction as a most suitable approach.