4.4 Article

Trends in Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty in Pediatric Patients

Journal

UROLOGY
Volume 81, Issue 6, Pages 1336-1341

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2013.01.025

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the incidence of pediatric robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasties (RALPs) and to determine if there were regional or age-related trends associated with the performance of RALP. METHODS Using 2005-2010 data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), the incidence of and trends in pyeloplasty in patients less than 18 years of age were assessed. This was broken down by open, laparoscopic, and robotic techniques when possible. Multiple logistic regression determined which characteristics were associated with increased performance of RALP. Population weighting was used to estimate national rates. RESULTS A total of 15,498 pediatric pyeloplasties were performed between 2005 and 2010. Coding for robotics began at the end of 2008, and, since then, 750 of the 5557 pediatric pyeloplasties were robotic. The rate of RALP remained unchanged from 2008-2010 (odds ratio [OR] 0.93, P = .051); however, there was an overall increase in minimally invasively procedures (RALP or laparoscopic) since 2005 (OR 1.4, P <.001). Factors associated with increased performance of RALP were aged above 11 years (OR 50.3, P <.001) and living in the northeast (OR 3.0, P = .001), midwest (OR 2.9, P = .001), or west (OR 4.31, P <.001) compared with the south. CONCLUSION An estimated 750 robotic pyeloplasties were performed in the United States between the end of 2008 and 2010. There was an increase in the total number of pyeloplasties performed using minimally invasive techniques since 2005. Older children are more likely and patients living in the south are less likely to be treated with robotic assistance. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available