A Comparison Of The Clinical Outcome Between Retroperitoneal Laparoscopic And Open Dismembered Pyeloplasty

Objective:To explore whether retroperitoneal laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty can replace traditional surgery by comparing its clinical effects with those of open surgery.Methods:Clinical data about52cases(A group)and63cases(B group)with UPJO respectively treated by dismembered retroperitoneal laparoscopic and open surgical pyeloplasty were analyzed retrospectively. The demographics of patients (Gender、 Age、the ASA score、 BMI index、the affected side), operation time, intraoperative blood loss, time of intestinal function postoperative recovery, analgesic dosage, post—operative hospital stay, incidence of postoperative complications and recurrence rate of hydronephrosis in two groups were compared. According to the data types used X2test, two-sample Wilcoxon t test and rank sum test, statistical significance was defined as P<0.05.Results:There are no significant differenees in the demographics of patients between two groups, so they are comparable. In group A, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, time of intestinal function postoperative recovery, analgesic dosage postoperative hospital stay are superior to those in group B, statistical differences are significant(P<0.05), but there are no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative complications、recurrence rate of hydronephrosis between two groups(P>0.05).Conclusions:Retropedtoneal laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty associates with minimal trauma, little pain and rapid recovery. It can gradually replace open operation in clinic, and would be the gold standard for treatment of UPJO.