Adult endopyelotomy: Impact of etiology and antegrade versus retrograde approach on outcome

Arieh L. Shalhav, Guido Giusti, Abdelhamid M. Elbahnasy, David M. Hoenig, Elspeth M. McDougall, Deborah S. Smith, Keegan L. Maxwell, Ralph V. Clayman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: We evaluate our experience with endopyelotomy for ureteropelvic junction obstruction by stratifying the results of an antegrade versus a retrograde approach for primary, secondary, calculi related, high insertion and impaired renal function related obstruction, individually. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed results of 149 nonrandomized patients treated for ureteropelvic junction obstruction, of whom 83 underwent antegrade percutaneous endopyelotomy using a right angle Greenwald electrode and 66 underwent retrograde endopyelotomy using a cutting balloon device. Subjective results were based on an analog pain scale, objective results on renal scan, excretory urography or Whitaker test and cost-effectiveness analysis on total treatment cost. Results: In both primary and secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction, retrograde endopyelotomy was related to a significantly shorter operating room time and hospital stay (p <0.05). When treating noncalculous primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (92 patients) there was a better objective, albeit not statistically significant, success rate with antegrade endopyelotomy (89 versus 71%) but retrograde endopyelotomy was 20% more cost-effective. When treating secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (37 patients) there was a better objective, albeit not statistically significant, success rate (83 versus 77%) with retrograde endopyelotomy, which was 37% more cost-effective. Complication rates were higher with antegrade compared to retrograde endopyelotomy for primary and secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (25 versus 14% and 26 versus 0%). In 20 patients with concomitant stones endopyelotomy results were better (93 to 100% success) than for any other categories of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Of note, endopyelotomy also provided a reasonable outcome among patients with a high insertion primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (70% success). Conclusions: Antegrade endopyelotomy is the preferred approach in patients with primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction and concomitant renal calculi (13.4% of cases), and may also be preferable in patients with high insertion obstruction (6.7%). For all other primary and all secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction, antegrade and retrograde endopyelotomy is effective therapy yet retrograde endopyelotomy results in less operating room time, shorter hospital stay, fewer complications and significantly less expense to achieve the desired outcome.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)685-689
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Urology
Volume160
Issue number3 I
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1998

Fingerprint

Operating Rooms
Length of Stay
Kidney
Costs and Cost Analysis
Kidney Calculi
Urography
Calculi
Pain Measurement
Health Care Costs
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Electrodes
Equipment and Supplies
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • Balloon dilatation
  • Endoscopy
  • Kidney pelvis
  • Nephrostomy
  • Percutaneous
  • Ureteral obstruction

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Shalhav, A. L., Giusti, G., Elbahnasy, A. M., Hoenig, D. M., McDougall, E. M., Smith, D. S., ... Clayman, R. V. (1998). Adult endopyelotomy: Impact of etiology and antegrade versus retrograde approach on outcome. Journal of Urology, 160(3 I), 685-689. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)62755-1

Adult endopyelotomy : Impact of etiology and antegrade versus retrograde approach on outcome. / Shalhav, Arieh L.; Giusti, Guido; Elbahnasy, Abdelhamid M.; Hoenig, David M.; McDougall, Elspeth M.; Smith, Deborah S.; Maxwell, Keegan L.; Clayman, Ralph V.

In: Journal of Urology, Vol. 160, No. 3 I, 1998, p. 685-689.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Shalhav, AL, Giusti, G, Elbahnasy, AM, Hoenig, DM, McDougall, EM, Smith, DS, Maxwell, KL & Clayman, RV 1998, 'Adult endopyelotomy: Impact of etiology and antegrade versus retrograde approach on outcome', Journal of Urology, vol. 160, no. 3 I, pp. 685-689. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)62755-1
Shalhav AL, Giusti G, Elbahnasy AM, Hoenig DM, McDougall EM, Smith DS et al. Adult endopyelotomy: Impact of etiology and antegrade versus retrograde approach on outcome. Journal of Urology. 1998;160(3 I):685-689. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)62755-1
Shalhav, Arieh L. ; Giusti, Guido ; Elbahnasy, Abdelhamid M. ; Hoenig, David M. ; McDougall, Elspeth M. ; Smith, Deborah S. ; Maxwell, Keegan L. ; Clayman, Ralph V. / Adult endopyelotomy : Impact of etiology and antegrade versus retrograde approach on outcome. In: Journal of Urology. 1998 ; Vol. 160, No. 3 I. pp. 685-689.
@article{7e08b572b1f84b90a76bfd5d51cb8ec2,
title = "Adult endopyelotomy: Impact of etiology and antegrade versus retrograde approach on outcome",
abstract = "Purpose: We evaluate our experience with endopyelotomy for ureteropelvic junction obstruction by stratifying the results of an antegrade versus a retrograde approach for primary, secondary, calculi related, high insertion and impaired renal function related obstruction, individually. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed results of 149 nonrandomized patients treated for ureteropelvic junction obstruction, of whom 83 underwent antegrade percutaneous endopyelotomy using a right angle Greenwald electrode and 66 underwent retrograde endopyelotomy using a cutting balloon device. Subjective results were based on an analog pain scale, objective results on renal scan, excretory urography or Whitaker test and cost-effectiveness analysis on total treatment cost. Results: In both primary and secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction, retrograde endopyelotomy was related to a significantly shorter operating room time and hospital stay (p <0.05). When treating noncalculous primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (92 patients) there was a better objective, albeit not statistically significant, success rate with antegrade endopyelotomy (89 versus 71{\%}) but retrograde endopyelotomy was 20{\%} more cost-effective. When treating secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (37 patients) there was a better objective, albeit not statistically significant, success rate (83 versus 77{\%}) with retrograde endopyelotomy, which was 37{\%} more cost-effective. Complication rates were higher with antegrade compared to retrograde endopyelotomy for primary and secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (25 versus 14{\%} and 26 versus 0{\%}). In 20 patients with concomitant stones endopyelotomy results were better (93 to 100{\%} success) than for any other categories of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Of note, endopyelotomy also provided a reasonable outcome among patients with a high insertion primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (70{\%} success). Conclusions: Antegrade endopyelotomy is the preferred approach in patients with primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction and concomitant renal calculi (13.4{\%} of cases), and may also be preferable in patients with high insertion obstruction (6.7{\%}). For all other primary and all secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction, antegrade and retrograde endopyelotomy is effective therapy yet retrograde endopyelotomy results in less operating room time, shorter hospital stay, fewer complications and significantly less expense to achieve the desired outcome.",
keywords = "Balloon dilatation, Endoscopy, Kidney pelvis, Nephrostomy, Percutaneous, Ureteral obstruction",
author = "Shalhav, {Arieh L.} and Guido Giusti and Elbahnasy, {Abdelhamid M.} and Hoenig, {David M.} and McDougall, {Elspeth M.} and Smith, {Deborah S.} and Maxwell, {Keegan L.} and Clayman, {Ralph V.}",
year = "1998",
doi = "10.1016/S0022-5347(01)62755-1",
language = "English",
volume = "160",
pages = "685--689",
journal = "Journal of Urology",
issn = "0022-5347",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "3 I",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Adult endopyelotomy

T2 - Impact of etiology and antegrade versus retrograde approach on outcome

AU - Shalhav, Arieh L.

AU - Giusti, Guido

AU - Elbahnasy, Abdelhamid M.

AU - Hoenig, David M.

AU - McDougall, Elspeth M.

AU - Smith, Deborah S.

AU - Maxwell, Keegan L.

AU - Clayman, Ralph V.

PY - 1998

Y1 - 1998

N2 - Purpose: We evaluate our experience with endopyelotomy for ureteropelvic junction obstruction by stratifying the results of an antegrade versus a retrograde approach for primary, secondary, calculi related, high insertion and impaired renal function related obstruction, individually. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed results of 149 nonrandomized patients treated for ureteropelvic junction obstruction, of whom 83 underwent antegrade percutaneous endopyelotomy using a right angle Greenwald electrode and 66 underwent retrograde endopyelotomy using a cutting balloon device. Subjective results were based on an analog pain scale, objective results on renal scan, excretory urography or Whitaker test and cost-effectiveness analysis on total treatment cost. Results: In both primary and secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction, retrograde endopyelotomy was related to a significantly shorter operating room time and hospital stay (p <0.05). When treating noncalculous primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (92 patients) there was a better objective, albeit not statistically significant, success rate with antegrade endopyelotomy (89 versus 71%) but retrograde endopyelotomy was 20% more cost-effective. When treating secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (37 patients) there was a better objective, albeit not statistically significant, success rate (83 versus 77%) with retrograde endopyelotomy, which was 37% more cost-effective. Complication rates were higher with antegrade compared to retrograde endopyelotomy for primary and secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (25 versus 14% and 26 versus 0%). In 20 patients with concomitant stones endopyelotomy results were better (93 to 100% success) than for any other categories of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Of note, endopyelotomy also provided a reasonable outcome among patients with a high insertion primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (70% success). Conclusions: Antegrade endopyelotomy is the preferred approach in patients with primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction and concomitant renal calculi (13.4% of cases), and may also be preferable in patients with high insertion obstruction (6.7%). For all other primary and all secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction, antegrade and retrograde endopyelotomy is effective therapy yet retrograde endopyelotomy results in less operating room time, shorter hospital stay, fewer complications and significantly less expense to achieve the desired outcome.

AB - Purpose: We evaluate our experience with endopyelotomy for ureteropelvic junction obstruction by stratifying the results of an antegrade versus a retrograde approach for primary, secondary, calculi related, high insertion and impaired renal function related obstruction, individually. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed results of 149 nonrandomized patients treated for ureteropelvic junction obstruction, of whom 83 underwent antegrade percutaneous endopyelotomy using a right angle Greenwald electrode and 66 underwent retrograde endopyelotomy using a cutting balloon device. Subjective results were based on an analog pain scale, objective results on renal scan, excretory urography or Whitaker test and cost-effectiveness analysis on total treatment cost. Results: In both primary and secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction, retrograde endopyelotomy was related to a significantly shorter operating room time and hospital stay (p <0.05). When treating noncalculous primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (92 patients) there was a better objective, albeit not statistically significant, success rate with antegrade endopyelotomy (89 versus 71%) but retrograde endopyelotomy was 20% more cost-effective. When treating secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (37 patients) there was a better objective, albeit not statistically significant, success rate (83 versus 77%) with retrograde endopyelotomy, which was 37% more cost-effective. Complication rates were higher with antegrade compared to retrograde endopyelotomy for primary and secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (25 versus 14% and 26 versus 0%). In 20 patients with concomitant stones endopyelotomy results were better (93 to 100% success) than for any other categories of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Of note, endopyelotomy also provided a reasonable outcome among patients with a high insertion primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction (70% success). Conclusions: Antegrade endopyelotomy is the preferred approach in patients with primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction and concomitant renal calculi (13.4% of cases), and may also be preferable in patients with high insertion obstruction (6.7%). For all other primary and all secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction, antegrade and retrograde endopyelotomy is effective therapy yet retrograde endopyelotomy results in less operating room time, shorter hospital stay, fewer complications and significantly less expense to achieve the desired outcome.

KW - Balloon dilatation

KW - Endoscopy

KW - Kidney pelvis

KW - Nephrostomy

KW - Percutaneous

KW - Ureteral obstruction

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032324251&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032324251&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)62755-1

DO - 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)62755-1

M3 - Article

C2 - 9720521

AN - SCOPUS:0032324251

VL - 160

SP - 685

EP - 689

JO - Journal of Urology

JF - Journal of Urology

SN - 0022-5347

IS - 3 I

ER -