Laparoscopic Versus Open Pyeloplasty in Children: Preliminary Report of a Prospective Randomized Trial

PurposePyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children has traditionally been performed using an open technique. Although laparoscopic pyeloplasty has been shown to be comparable and possibly superior to open pyeloplasty in adult studies, such results in the pediatric population are limited. We evaluated outcomes between transperitoneal laparoscopic and open pyeloplasty in children.Materials and MethodsAll children 1 to 18 years old with ureteropelvic junction obstruction requiring operative repair were offered enrollment in the study. Patients were prospectively randomized to either transperitoneal laparoscopic or open pyeloplasty through a flank incision.ResultsWe reviewed 20 patients (mean age 7.8 years) who underwent laparoscopy and 19 (7.2 years) who underwent open surgery (p = 0.48). Mean followup was similar between the groups (laparoscopic 8.1 months vs open 11.1 months, p = 0.38). Mean operative time was 151 minutes (range 94 to 213) for laparoscopy and 130 minutes (83 to 225) for open surgery (p = 0.09). Mean hospitalization was 29.3 hours (range 20.5 to 48) for laparoscopy and 36.2 hours (24 to 73) for open surgery (p = 0.06). Analgesic usage was similar between the groups. One failure in the open arm required a revision. Operative, hospital, anesthetic and total charges were similar between the groups.ConclusionsLaparoscopic pyeloplasty appears to be a safe and effective alternative to open pyeloplasty in children. Although the cost is similar, there is a trend toward longer operative times in the laparoscopic group but a shorter overall hospitalization. As more patients are enrolled in the study, these differences may prove significant.