Pd44-04 the Effect of Preoperative Ureteral Stent on Outcomes of Robotic Pyeloplasty for Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction: Is Ureteral Rest Necessary?

You have accessJournal of UrologyReconstruction: Ureteral Reconstruction (Including Pyeloplasty) and Bladder Reconstruction (Including Trauma-Related Fistula) II (PD44)1 May 2024PD44-04 THE EFFECT OF PREOPERATIVE URETERAL STENT ON OUTCOMES OF ROBOTIC PYELOPLASTY FOR URETEROPELVIC JUNCTION OBSTRUCTION: IS URETERAL REST NECESSARY? Jason L. Zappia, Courtney L. Yong, Leo Song, Ronald Boris, and Chandru Sundaram Jason L. ZappiaJason L. Zappia , Courtney L. YongCourtney L. Yong , Leo SongLeo Song , Ronald BorisRonald Boris , and Chandru SundaramChandru Sundaram View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001008800.83683.92.04AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: To determine whether ureteral stent placement versus no stent for preoperative management of ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) prior to definitive robotic pyeloplasty affects pyeloplasty outcomes. METHODS: Patients undergoing robotic pyeloplasty for symptomatic UPJO at a single academic center from 2009 to 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were stratified into two groups based on placement of ureteral stent for UPJO prior to definitive robotic pyeloplasty. Patient demographics and characteristics were gathered (Table 1). Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed (Table 1). Kaplan-Meier analysis of pyeloplasty success, which was defined as no additional surgical intervention for UPJO following pyeloplasty, was performed (Figure 1). RESULTS: 192 patients were included in our analysis. There were no differences in preoperative patient demographics or characteristics between groups (Table 1). There were significant differences in operative time (227 vs 210 minutes, p<0.0001) and frequency of ureteral fibrosis requiring ureterolysis (13.6% vs 8.8%, p=0.0025) between groups (Table 1). There was no significant difference (p=0.1342) in long-term success rates of robotic pyeloplasty for UPJO when stratified by pre-operative ureteral stent placement (Figure 1). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic pyeloplasty for UPJO can be performed safely and with similar long-term outcomes following pre-operative ureteral stent placement compared to percutaneous nephrostomy tube (PCN) or no stent. Patients should not be limited to the traditional practice of PCN placement for management of UPJO prior to pyeloplasty. Additional studies should be performed to determine whether forgoing placement of preoperative PCN could result in improved quality of life and self-image while patients await definitive robotic pyeloplasty. Download PPT Source of Funding: None © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e905 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Jason L. Zappia More articles by this author Courtney L. Yong More articles by this author Leo Song More articles by this author Ronald Boris More articles by this author Chandru Sundaram More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...