Objective: We investigated the invasiveness of antegrade endopyelotomy and open pyeloplasty in two consecutive series of patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Patients and Methods: 98 patients were treated by open pyeloplasty from 1980 to 1991, and 137 patients by antegrade endopyelotomy from 1991 to 1999. Diagnosis of ureteropelvic junction obstruction was made by excretory urogram and/or antegrade pyelography, diuretic renography and retrograde pyelography. Invasiveness was evaluated by the postoperative need for analgesics, the complication rate and the residual long-term symptoms after surgery. Results: The postoperative need for opiate analgesics was significantly higher in patients after open pyeloplasty than after antegrade endopyelotomy. Ten percent of the patients complained of problems with the lumbotomy scar after open pyeloplasty, which was not encountered after endopyelotomy. Complications after open pyeloplasty occurred in 24% and were more severe than the 11% seen after endopyelotomy. The primary success rate after open pyeloplasty was 98 and 89% after antegrade endopyelotomy. The long-term success rate, ≧24 month postoperatively, was 96% (median follow-up 37 (24–196) months) and 76% (median follow-up 32 (24–73) months), respectively. Conclusion: Open pyeloplasty and endopyelotomy both have a high success rate with better patency results after open pyeloplasty. Open pyeloplasty is more invasive and has a higher morbidity. Endopyelotomy is a minimally invasive procedure with faster recovery, fewer and minor complications, significantly less need for peri- and postoperative analgesics, less residual pain due to the access, and no functional and esthetic sequelae of lumbotomy.

Keywords:
Ureteropelvic junction obstruction, Pyeloplasty, open, Antegrade endopyelotomy, invasiveness
This content is only available via PDF.
© 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel
2007
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.