Ureteral Reimplantation for Primary Obstructive Megaureter in Pediatric Patients: Is It Time for Robot-Assisted Approach?

• DOI: 10.1089/lap.2021.0246
• Publication Date: 2021-12-14T19:40:38Z
• Authors: Simone Sforza; Chiara Cini; Elisa Negri; Giulia Bortot; Fabrizio Di Maida; Gianmartin Cito; Maria Escolino; Ciro Esposito; Andrea Minervini; Lorenzo Masieri
• Keywords: Vesico-Ureteral Reflux; Robotics; 03 medical and health sciences; Treatment Outcome; 0302 clinical medicine; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Replantation; Humans; Urologic Surgical Procedures; Laparoscopy; Ureter; Child; Retrospective Studies; Ureteral Obstruction

Objective: To compare open and robotic approach for treatment of Primary Obstructive Megaureter (POM) in a series of pediatric patients. Materials and Methods: Medical records of all patients who had undergone ureteral reimplantation for POM at our institution, between January 2016 and December 2019, were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Open (Group B) and robotic (Group A) approach were compared. Success was defined as reduction of anteroposterior diameter of pelvis and ureter on postoperative ultrasound scan. Surgical complications were reported according to the Clavien-Dindo Classification. Esthetic results were compared through the Vancouver Scar Scale. Results: Out of 23 patients, 11 belonged to Group A (5M and 6F) and 12 to Group B (9M and 3F). Median age at diagnosis was 38 months in Group A and 46 months in Group B (P = .69). Operative times were comparable (150' Group A and 140' Group B; P = .35), but the hospital stay was significantly shorter in the robotic group (P < .01). Success rate was comparable: 90.9% in Group A and 91.7% in Group B, respectively (P = .95). Incidence of early complications was 9.1% in Group A (grade IIIB) and 8.3% in Group B (grade II) (P = .95). Esthetic evaluation obtained a median score of 1 in Group A and 3 in Group B (P < .01). Conclusions: Our preliminary experience shows that robotic reimplantation can be a safe option in the treatment of POM in pediatric patients with clinical outcomes comparable to the open technique.