Author(s)

MaBao Yuan¹, KaMei Zhao², ZhenYing Lin¹, ZhongJing Yu¹, MengCheng Yang¹, HuanYuan Li¹, BaoXin Zhang¹, ZhiFeng Mo^2*

Affiliation(s)

¹Shenzhen Baoan Women's and Children Hospital, Shenzhen 518100, Guangdong, China.

²The Seventh Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Shenzhen 518000, Guangdong, China.

Corresponding Author

ZhiFeng Mo

ABSTRACT

Background: The application of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALP) in paediatric urology is increasing, but there is still controversy about the efficacy and safety of RALP compared to traditional treatment assisted laparoscopic surgery (LAP) in increasing obstructive uropathy at the ureteropelvic junction (UPJO) in children. This meta-analysis of effects to evaluate and evaluate the clinical efficacy of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALP) and paediatric pyeloplasty in laparoscopic treatment of UPJO, A computer search was conducted in English as PubMed, Cochrane database, Web of Science, OVID, and in Chinese databases as Sinomed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Weipu database, and Wanfang databases for relevant literature, with categorical dates up to December 2024. The Man 5.4 variables were used for meta-analysis of the literature data. For risk ratio, the literature (RR) was used as the reference database, RevMan used for statistical measures, such as statistical databases. The mean (MD) was conducted. Descriptive analysis was conducted for patients with less literature and postoperative data. Results: A total of 13 studies were included, with 916 cases, all undergoing pyeloplasty. RALP superiority aspects over traditional laparoscopic surgery in the following surgical success rate [RR = 1.04, 95% CI (1.01, 1.07)], ureteropelvic anastomosis [MD = -27.39, 95% CI (-44.33, -10.46)], postoperative retention time [MD = -1.00, 95% CI (-1.42, -0.58)], stay insufficient [MD = -1.17, 95% CI (-1.82, -0.52)], intraoperative blood loss [MD = -2.98, 95% CI (-4.77, -1.19)], and reoperation rate [RR = 0.38, 95% CI (0.16, 0.87)], all statistically significant differences after renal surgery (P < 0.05). RALP had significant differences compared to traditional higher [MD = 2.68, 95% CI (1.78, 3.58)] (p < 0.05), which showed significant posterior ior-changes (APD) and laparoscopic surgery [MD = -0.08, 95% CI (-0.26, 0.10)], statistically significant split function (GRF) [MD = 0.69, 95% CI (-1.85, before laparoscopic surgery] 3.24)], operating time [MD = -9.8, 95% CI (-24.04, 4.44)], postoperative complications [RR = 0.70, 95% CI (0.43, 1.14)], and follow-up time [MD = 0.08, 95% CI (-3.33, 3.49)] showed no statistically significant differences (P > 0.05). Conclusion: With pyeloplasty, pyeloplasty has a significant effect in treating renal paediatric vis-ureter obstruction groups, laparoscopic pyeloplasty has been compared with conventional pyeloplasty. pelvis-ureter anastomosis shorter time, less bleeding, shorter duration of postoperative drainage, lower reoperation rates, and shorter postoperative hospital stays. This robotic-assisted pyeloplasty has been shown to result in a higher success rate, faster recovery rates, and long-term better surgical outcomes. However, due to high hospital discharge, this remains certain in its application.

KEYWORDS

Ureteropelvic junction obstruction; Robotic surgery; Laparoscopy; Treatment outcome; Meta-analysis

CITE THIS PAPER

MaBao Yuan, KaMei Zhao, ZhenYing Lin, ZhongJing Yu, MengCheng Yang, HuanYuan Li, BaoXin Zhang, ZhiFeng Mo. Robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty for pediatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a meta-analysis. Eurasia Journal of Science and Technology. 2025, 7(4): 26-37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.61784/ejst3086.

REFERENCES

[1] Zhou H, Cao H, Li P, et al. Guidelines for pediatric robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction (2020 edition). Chinese Journal of Urology, 2020, 41.

[2] Yang P, Li K, Zou B, et al. Meta-analysis of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty versus traditional laparoscopic pyeloplasty for pediatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Surgery, 2022, 21(05): 482-489.

[3] Esposito C, Masieri L, Castagnetti M, et al. Robot-assisted vs laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children with uretero-pelvic junction obstruction (UPJO): technical considerations and results. Journal of Pediatric Urology, 2019, 15(6): 667, e1-e8.

[4] Lv Y, Xie H, Huang Y, et al. Comparison of clinical application of traditional laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic techniques in pediatric pyeloplasty. Chinese Journal of Pediatric Surgery, 2019, 40: 41-44.

[5] Riachy E, Cost N G, Defoor W R, et al. Pediatric standard and robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty: a comparative single institution study. J Urol, 2013, 189(1): 283-7.

[6] Liu Q, Xing X, Zeng X, et al. Comparison of therapeutic effects of robot-assisted laparoscopic and traditional laparoscopic treatment for pediatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Surgery, 2023, 22.

[7] Liu H. Comparative analysis of robot-assisted and laparoscopic pyeloplasty for pediatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction, 2023.

[8] Li Y. Comparison of therapeutic effects of robot-assisted and pediatric laparoscopic Anderson-Hynes procedure for pediatric congenital UPJHN, 2023.

[9] Li J, Chen J, Jia J, et al. Comparison of therapeutic effects of robot-assisted single-site plus one laparoscopic and single-site laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children with ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Chinese Medical Journal, 2024, 104.

[10] Tam Y H, Pang K K Y, Wong Y S, et al. From Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty to Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty in Primary and Reoperative Repairs for Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction in Children. Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques Part A, 2018, 28(8): 1012-1018.

[11] Sun L, Zhao D, Shen Y, et al. Laparoscopic versus robot-assisted pyeloplasty in infants and young children. Asian Journal of Surgery, 2023, 46(2): 868-873.

[12] Silay M S, Danacioglu O, Ozel K, et al. Laparoscopy versus robotic-assisted pyeloplasty in children: preliminary results of a pilot prospective randomized controlled trial. World Journal of Urology, 2020, 38(8): 1841-1848.

[13] Patel A, Pickhardt M W, Littlejohn N, et al. Shortened operative time for pediatric robotic versus laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty. The Canadian Journal of Urology, 2016, 23(3): 8308-8311.

[14] Passerotti CC, Podnar D, Jednak R, et al. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in infants and children: A single-center experience. Journal of Laparoendoscopic &Advanced Surgical Techniques, 2014, 24(8): 587-592.

[15] Koga H, Murakami H, Seo S, et al. Retroperitoneoscopic Pyeloplasty for Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction in Children: Value of Robotic Assistance. Journal of Pediatric Surgery, 2023, 58(7): 1291-1295.

[16] Gonzalez S T, Rosito T E, Tur A B, et al. Multicenter comparative study of open, laparoscopic, and robotic pyeloplasty in the pediatric population for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). Int Braz J Urol, 2022, 48(6): 961-968.

[17] Neheman A, Kord E, Zisman A, et al. Comparison of Robotic Pyeloplasty and Standard Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty in Infants: A Bi-Institutional Study. Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques Part A, 2018, 28(4): 467-470.

[18] Jia M, Gao Z, Wang W, et al. Application of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in pediatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Chinese Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery, 2022, 22(6).

[19] Andolfi C, Adamic B, Oommen J, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in infants and children: is it superior to conventional laparoscopy? World J Urol, 2020, 38(8): 1827-1833.

[20] Xu Z, Xie J, Gao W, et al. Preliminary experience of da Vinci robotic surgery for pediatric hydronephrosis. Chinese Journal of Endourology and Minimally Invasive Urology (Electronic Edition), 2017, 11(03): 154-157.

[21] Lv Y, Xie H, Huang Y, et al. Preliminary exploration of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children. Chinese Journal of Urology, 2015: 721-725.

[22] Zhou H, Cao H. Application and current status of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery in pediatric urology. Chinese Journal of Laparoscopic Surgery (Electronic Edition), 2018, 11(02): 72-76.