A. Goel et Ak. Hemal, Upper and mid-ureteric stones: a prospective unrandomized comparison of retroperitoneoscopic and open ureterolithotomy, BJU INT, 88(7), 2001, pp. 679-682
Objectives To review our experience of retroperitoneoscopic ureterolithotom
y (RPUL) and to compare the results with those from open surgery.
Patients and methods Between March 1994 and mid-December 2000, 55 patients
with large (mean 2.1 cm) upper and mid-ureteric calculi, and with normal re
nal values, underwent RPUL. In 22 patients, earlier attempts with extracorp
oreal shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy had failed. These patients we
re compared with 26 (mean stone size 2.4 cm) who underwent open ureterolith
otomy during the same period. The two groups had similar distributions for
age, sex, stone size and stone location: most stones were calcium-based.
Results The mean operative duration and blood loss for RPUL and open surger
y were 108.8 and 98.8 min. and 58.5 and 50.5 mL, respectively (not signific
ant). The mean analgesic (pethidine) requirement and hospital stay for RPUL
and open surgery were 41.1 and 96.9 mg, and 3.3 and 4.8 days, respectively
(P < 0.001). The duration of convalescence was significantly less after RP
UL than open surgery (1.8 weeks vs 3.1). There were 10 conversions, which O
ccurred early in the series, and one significant complication amongst patie
nts who underwent RPUL.
Conclusions RPUL is comparable with open surgery for operative duration and
blood loss, but the laparoscopic procedure has significant advantages over
open surgery for analgesia, hospital stay, recuperation and cosmesis. RPUL
is a viable alternative for large upper and mid-ureteric calculi and in th
ose patients where a previous attempt at endourological management has fail
ed. However, the technique requires significant training and experience bef
ore good results can be obtained.