Transperitoneal Versus Retroperitoneal Robotic-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty for Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction in Children. A Multicentre, Prospective Study

Background: Robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) has been gaining acceptance among paediatric urologists.

Objective: To compare surgical variables and clinical outcomes, including complications and success rate, with RALP using the transperitoneal (T-RALP) and retroperitoneal (R-RALP) approaches.

Design setting and participants: We performed a multicentre, prospective, cohort study (NCT03274050) between November 2016 and October 2021 in three paediatric urology teaching centres (transperitoneal approach, n = 2; retroperitoneal approach, n = 1). The diagnosis of ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) was confirmed by renal ultrasound and mercaptoacetyltriglycine-3 renal scan or uro-magnetic resonance imaging with functional evaluation. The exclusion criteria were children <2 yr old, persistent UPJO after failed pyeloplasty, and horseshoe and ectopic kidney.

Intervention: We performed dismembered pyeloplasty using running monofilament 6-0 absorbable suture.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: We assessed intra- and postoperative morbidity (primary outcome) and success (secondary outcome). Data were expressed as medians and interquartile range (25th and 75th percentiles) for quantitative variables, and analysed comparatively.

Results and limitations: We operated on 106 children (T-RALP, n = 53; R-RALP, n = 53). Preoperative data were comparable between groups (median age 9.1 [6.2-11.2] yr; median weight 26.8 [21-40] kg). Set-up time (10 vs 31 min), anastomotic time (49 vs 73 min), and console time (97 vs 153 min) were significantly shorter with T-RALP than with R-RALP (p < 0.001). No intraoperative complications occurred. No conversion to open surgery was necessary. The median hospital stay was longer after T-RALP (2 d) than after R-RALP (1 d; p < 0.001). Overall, postoperative complication rates were similar. No failure had occurred at the mean follow-up of 25.4 (15.1-34.7) mo.

Conclusions: In selected children, RALP is safe and effective using either the transperitoneal or the retroperitoneal approach, with a shorter hospital stay after R-RALP.

Patient summary: In our multicentre, prospective study, we compared the results and complications of robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) using the transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches. We found that RALP is safe and effective using either approach, with a shorter hospital stay after R-RALP.