Salvage minimally invasive robotic and laparoscopic pyeloplasty in adults: a systematic review

References

• Chow AK, Rosenberg BJ, Capoccia EM, et al. Risk factors and management options for the adult failed ureteropelvic junction obstruction repair in the era of minimally invasive and robotic approaches: a comprehensive literature review. J Endourol. 2020;34(11):1112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Türk IA, Davis JW, Winkelmann B, et al. Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty–the method of choice in the presence of an enlarged renal pelvis and crossing vessels. Eur Urol. 2002;42(3):268.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inagaki T, Rha KH, Ong AM, et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: current status. BJU Int. 2005;95(Suppl s2):102.
   Google Scholar
• Bachmann A, Ruszat R, Forster T, et al. Retroperitoneoscopic pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO): solving the technical difficulties. Eur Urol. 2006;49(2):264.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swearingen R, Ambani S, Faerber GJ, et al. Definitive management of failure after pyeloplasty. J Endourol. 2016;30(Suppl S1):S23.
   Google Scholar
• Autorino R, Eden C, El-Ghoneimi A, et al. Robot-assisted and laparoscopic repair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2014;65:430.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammady A, Elbadry MS, Rashed EN, et al. Laparoscopic repyeloplasty after failed open repair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a case-matched multi-institutional study. Scand J Urol. 2017;51(5):402.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schuessler WW, Grune MT, Tecuanhuey LV, et al. Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty. J Urol. 1993;150(6):1795.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abraham GP, Siddaiah AT, Ramaswami K, et al. Laparoscopic management of recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction following pyeloplasty. Urol Ann. 2015;7(2):183.
   Google Scholar
• Franco I, Dyer LL, Zelkovic P. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty in the pediatric patient: hand sewn anastomosis versus robotic assisted anastomosis–is there a difference? J Urol. 2007;178(4):1483.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dirie NI, Ahmed MA, Mohamed MA, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in adults: a comparison analysis of primary versus redo pyeloplasty in a single center. Urol J. 2020;18(1):45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sivaraman A, Leveillee RJ, Patel MB, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a multi-institutional experience. Urology. 2012;79(2):351.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corcione F, Esposito C, Cuccurullo D, et al. Advantages and limits of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery: preliminary experience. Surg Endosc. 2005;19(1):117.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein MI, Wheeler NJ, Craig C. Sideways camera rotations of 90° and 135° result in poorer performance of laparoscopic tasks for novices. Hum Factors. 2015;57(2):246.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Song SH, Lee C, Jung J, et al. A comparative study of pediatric open pyeloplasty, laparoscopy-assisted extracorporeal pyeloplasty, and robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty. PLoS One. 2017;12(4):e0175026.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leonardo CR, Muzzi A, Tavora JE, et al. The outcomes of mini-laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children - brazilian experience. Int Braz J Urol. 2020;46(2):253.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, et al., editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.0. 2nd ed. Cochrane, Wiley Publisher; 2019 July.
   Google Scholar
• Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atug F, Burgess SV, Castle EP, et al. Role of robotics in the management of secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Int J Clin Pract. 2006;60(1):9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee M, Lee Z, Strauss D, et al. Multi-institutional experience comparing outcomes of adult patients undergoing secondary versus primary robotic pyeloplasty. Urology. 2020;145:275.
   Google Scholar
• Lucas SM, Sundaram CP, Wolf JS Jr., et al. Factors that impact the outcome of minimally invasive pyeloplasty: results of the multi-institutional laparoscopic and robotic pyeloplasty collaborative group. J Urol. 2012;187(2):522.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mufarrij PW, Woods M, Shah OD, et al. Robotic dismembered pyeloplasty: a 6-year, multi-institutional experience. J Urol. 2008;180(4):1391.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niver BE, Agalliu I, Bareket R, et al. Analysis of robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyleloplasty for primary versus secondary repair in 119 consecutive cases. Urology. 2012;79(3):689.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwentner C, Pelzer A, Neururer R, et al. Robotic Anderson-Hynes pyeloplasty: 5-year experience of one centre. BJU Int. 2007;100(4):880.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thom MR, Haseebuddin M, Roytman TM, et al. Robot-assisted pyeloplasty: outcomes for primary and secondary repairs, a single institution experience. Int Braz J Urol. 2012;38(1):77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shapiro EY, Cho JS, Srinivasan A, et al. Long-term follow-up for salvage laparoscopic pyeloplasty after failed open pyeloplasty. Urology. 2009;73(1):115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ambani SN, Yang DY, Wolf JS Jr. Matched comparison of primary versus salvage laparoscopic pyeloplasty. World J Urol. 2017;35(6):951.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brito AH, Mitre AI, Srougi M. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty in secondary obstruction. J Endourol. 2007;21(12):1481.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiancone F, Fedelini M, Pucci L, et al. Laparoscopic management of recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction following pyeloplasty: a single surgical team experience with 38 cases. Int Braz J Urol. 2017;43(3):512.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eden C, Gianduzzo T, Chang C, et al. Extraperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty for primary and secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J Urol. 2004;172(6 Part 1):2308.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ost MC, Kaye JD, Guttman MJ, et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty versus antegrade endopyelotomy: comparison in 100 patients and a new algorithm for the minimally invasive treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Urology. 2005;66(5):47.
   Google Scholar
• Shadpour P, Haghighi R, Maghsoudi R, et al. Laparoscopic redo pyeloplasty after failed open surgery. Urol J. 2011;8(1):31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sundaram CP, Grubb RL 3rd, Rehman J, et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty for secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J Urol. 2003;169(6):2037.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Ouyang W, Xu H, et al. Secondary management for recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction after pyeloplasty: a comparison of re-do robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty and conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Urol Int. 2019;103(4):466.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grasso M, Caruso RP, Phillips CK. UPJ obstruction in the adult population: are crossing vessels significant? Rev Urol. 2001;3(1):42.
   Google Scholar
• Chammas MF Jr., Mitre AI, Hubert N, et al. Robotic laparoscopic pyeloplasty. Jsls. 2014;18(1):110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dirie NI, Ahmed MA, Wang S. Is secondary robotic pyeloplasty safe and effective as primary robotic pyeloplasty? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Robot Surg. 2020;14(2):241.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varkarakis IM, Bhayani SB, Allaf ME, et al. Management of secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction after failed primary laparoscopic pyeloplasty. J Urol. 2004;172(1):180.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atug F, Woods M, Burgess SV, et al. Robotic assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children. J Urol. 2005;174(4 Part 1):1440.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Minnillo BJ, Cruz JAS, Sayao RH, et al. Long-term experience and outcomes of robotic assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children and young adults. J Urol. 2011;185(4):1455.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh P, Dogra PN, Kumar R, et al. Outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children: a single center experience. J Endourol. 2012;26(3):249.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar