Objective: To compare the surgical and functional outcomes of open, laparoscopic and robotic dismembered pyeloplasty for the treatment of patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). Material and methods:Between 2007 and 2012, a total of 56 patients underwent conventional open (Group 1; n=25), laparoscopic (Group 2; n=16), and robotic (Group 3; n=15) dismembered pyeloplasty operations. Preoperative evaluation was performed using urinalysis, urine culture, blood biochemistry, urinary ultrasound, intravenous pyelogram (IVP) (optional) and Mercaptoacetyltriglycine (MAG-3) renal scan. The mean operation time, estimated blood loss, drain removal time, narcotic analgesic requirements, length of hospital stay and functional outcomes were compared among groups. Statistical analyses were performed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) v. 20 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA) software, and statistically significant differences were determined using a p value <0.05. Results:The mean age of the patients was 30 years in Group 1, 34.3 years in Group 2 and 32.9 years in Group 3. The mean operation time was 127, 130 and 114 min (p=0.32), and the estimated blood loss was 105, 31 and 28 mL, respectively (p=0.001). The drain was removed after 4.36 (±1.3), 2.33 (±0.6) and 1.8 (±0.6) days after surgery (p<0.001), and the mean hospital stay was 4.14 (±1.8), 2.8 (±0.75) and 2 (±1) days, respectively (p<0.001). Narcotic analgesic requirement was significantly higher in Group 1 compared with Groups 2 and 3 (p=0.02). The radiographic and symptomatic success rates were 96% in Group 1, 93.75% in Group 2 and 93.3% in Group 3. Conclusion:Laparoscopic and robotic pyeloplasty are feasible, effective, reliable and minimally invasive treatment approaches for the treatment of UPJO as compared with open dismembered pyeloplasty.

BACKGROUND:We aimed to compare the surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) with open partial nephrectomy (OPN) in the management of small renal masses.MATERIALS AND METHODS:Between 2009 and 2013, a total of 46 RAPN patients and 20 OPN patients was included in this study. Patients’ demographics, mean operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), warm ischemia time (WIT), length of hospital stay, pre- and post-operative renal functions, complications and oncological outcomes were recorded, prospectively.RESULTS:Mean tumor size was 4.04 cm in OPN group and 3.56 cm in RAPN group (P = 0.27). Mean R.E.N.A.L nephrometry score was 6.35 in OPN group and 5.35 in RAPN group (P = 0.02). The mean operative time was 152 min in OPN group and 225 min in RAPN group (P = 0.006). The mean EBL in OPN and RAPN groups were 417 ml and 268 ml, respectively (P = 0.001). WIT in OPN group was significantly shorter than RAPN group (18.02 min vs. 23.33 min, P = 0.003). The mean drain removal time and the length of hospital stay were longer in OPN group. There were no significant differences in terms of renal functional outcomes and postoperative complications between groups.CONCLUSION:Minimally invasive surgical management of renal masses with RAPN offers better outcomes in terms of EBL and length of stay. However, the mean operative time and WIT were significantly shorter in OPN group. RAPN is a safe and effective minimally invasive alternative to OPN in terms of oncological and functional outcomes.

Minimally invasive pyeloplasty has low morbidity, short length of stay, and less blood loss compared with open surgical repair. It is an effective and feasible minimally invasive treatment modality for ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

A fistula is defined as an abnormal association of two or more epithelial lining. Therefore, vesicocutaneous fistula (VCF) represents an extra anatomic communication between the bladder wall and the external surface of the skin. The most common cause is iatrogenic; however, numerous factors may play a role in the formation of VCFs. When a VCF is identified, it should be treated properly due to its bothersome complaints and social effects. Nonetheless, no certain consensus has been achieved, yet. In this case, we report the feasibility and efficacy of omental flap interposition during VCF repair.