Cargando…

Retrospective comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic pyeloplasty using barbed suture versus nonbarbed suture: A single-center experience

INTRODUCTION: laparoscopic pyeloplasty is an important tool in urology armamentarium. The most important & also the difficult part of this surgery is intracorporial suturing and knotting. There are only a few reports of knotless Barbed sutures for upper tract reconstruction. We report the compar...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Giri, Vikas, Yadav, Sher Singh, Tomar, Vinay, Jha, Amit K., Garg, Amit
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6798306/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31649463
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/UA.UA_123_15
_version_ 1783460004799447040
author Giri, Vikas
Yadav, Sher Singh
Tomar, Vinay
Jha, Amit K.
Garg, Amit
author_facet Giri, Vikas
Yadav, Sher Singh
Tomar, Vinay
Jha, Amit K.
Garg, Amit
author_sort Giri, Vikas
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: laparoscopic pyeloplasty is an important tool in urology armamentarium. The most important & also the difficult part of this surgery is intracorporial suturing and knotting. There are only a few reports of knotless Barbed sutures for upper tract reconstruction. We report the comparative outcomes of Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty with barbed suture vs non barbed sutures used for uretero-pelvic anastomosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients' records that underwent Laparoscopic pyeloplasty at our Institution from January 2013 to May 2014. Total 37 patients were underwent LP in this period. Whole of the procedure was same as conventional LP except suture material. 3-0 barbed suture was used in 21 patients and 3-0 vicryl used in 16 patients for uretero-pelvic anastomosis and continuous suturing technique was employed. Patients' demographics, total operative time, intracorporial suturing time, post operative complications, symptoms & renal isotope scan were recorded. RESULTS: Average total operative time was significantly less in barbed suture group vs vicryl group (162 vs 208 minutes) (p=0.0811). Average time taken for intracorporial suturing was 31.2 minutes vs 70 minutes (p=0.0576). 1 patient developed post operative urine leak which persisted for 5 days in barbed group (4.76 %) vs no leak in vicryl group. Most common complication was UTI presented in 2 patients (9.5 %) vs 2 in vicryl (12.5%). JJ stent was removed at 4 weeks. Median follow up was 3 months with 7 patients lost to follow up. None of the patients found to have obstructive drainage or deterioration of split function on follow up isotope renogram at 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, Laparoscopic pyeloplasty with barbed suture has acceptable outcome when compared to conventional non barbed suture on short term basis. Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty with barbed suture can potentially become the standard approach in near future.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6798306
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67983062019-10-24 Retrospective comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic pyeloplasty using barbed suture versus nonbarbed suture: A single-center experience Giri, Vikas Yadav, Sher Singh Tomar, Vinay Jha, Amit K. Garg, Amit Urol Ann Original Article INTRODUCTION: laparoscopic pyeloplasty is an important tool in urology armamentarium. The most important & also the difficult part of this surgery is intracorporial suturing and knotting. There are only a few reports of knotless Barbed sutures for upper tract reconstruction. We report the comparative outcomes of Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty with barbed suture vs non barbed sutures used for uretero-pelvic anastomosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients' records that underwent Laparoscopic pyeloplasty at our Institution from January 2013 to May 2014. Total 37 patients were underwent LP in this period. Whole of the procedure was same as conventional LP except suture material. 3-0 barbed suture was used in 21 patients and 3-0 vicryl used in 16 patients for uretero-pelvic anastomosis and continuous suturing technique was employed. Patients' demographics, total operative time, intracorporial suturing time, post operative complications, symptoms & renal isotope scan were recorded. RESULTS: Average total operative time was significantly less in barbed suture group vs vicryl group (162 vs 208 minutes) (p=0.0811). Average time taken for intracorporial suturing was 31.2 minutes vs 70 minutes (p=0.0576). 1 patient developed post operative urine leak which persisted for 5 days in barbed group (4.76 %) vs no leak in vicryl group. Most common complication was UTI presented in 2 patients (9.5 %) vs 2 in vicryl (12.5%). JJ stent was removed at 4 weeks. Median follow up was 3 months with 7 patients lost to follow up. None of the patients found to have obstructive drainage or deterioration of split function on follow up isotope renogram at 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, Laparoscopic pyeloplasty with barbed suture has acceptable outcome when compared to conventional non barbed suture on short term basis. Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty with barbed suture can potentially become the standard approach in near future. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6798306/ /pubmed/31649463 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/UA.UA_123_15 Text en Copyright: © 2019 Urology Annals http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Giri, Vikas
Yadav, Sher Singh
Tomar, Vinay
Jha, Amit K.
Garg, Amit
Retrospective comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic pyeloplasty using barbed suture versus nonbarbed suture: A single-center experience
title Retrospective comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic pyeloplasty using barbed suture versus nonbarbed suture: A single-center experience
title_full Retrospective comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic pyeloplasty using barbed suture versus nonbarbed suture: A single-center experience
title_fullStr Retrospective comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic pyeloplasty using barbed suture versus nonbarbed suture: A single-center experience
title_full_unstemmed Retrospective comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic pyeloplasty using barbed suture versus nonbarbed suture: A single-center experience
title_short Retrospective comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic pyeloplasty using barbed suture versus nonbarbed suture: A single-center experience
title_sort retrospective comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic pyeloplasty using barbed suture versus nonbarbed suture: a single-center experience
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6798306/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31649463
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/UA.UA_123_15
work_keys_str_mv AT girivikas retrospectivecomparisonofoutcomesoflaparoscopicpyeloplastyusingbarbedsutureversusnonbarbedsutureasinglecenterexperience
AT yadavshersingh retrospectivecomparisonofoutcomesoflaparoscopicpyeloplastyusingbarbedsutureversusnonbarbedsutureasinglecenterexperience
AT tomarvinay retrospectivecomparisonofoutcomesoflaparoscopicpyeloplastyusingbarbedsutureversusnonbarbedsutureasinglecenterexperience
AT jhaamitk retrospectivecomparisonofoutcomesoflaparoscopicpyeloplastyusingbarbedsutureversusnonbarbedsutureasinglecenterexperience
AT gargamit retrospectivecomparisonofoutcomesoflaparoscopicpyeloplastyusingbarbedsutureversusnonbarbedsutureasinglecenterexperience