Laparoscopic Versus Open Pyeloplasty for Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose: To comprehensively review the available evidences in the literature on the use of laparoscopic pyeloplasty (LP) vs open pyeloplasty (OP) for the repair of ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction in children. Materials and Methods: Published studies until the end of October 2010 were searched from Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Ovid, and Cochrane databases. The literature search, quality assessment, and data extraction were independently performed by two reviewers. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed by using Review Manager 4.2.8 software. Results: Of 1403 studies, one randomized controlled trial (RCT), two prospective comparative studies, and six retrospective observational studies were eligible for inclusion criteria, comprising 694 cases of LP and 7334 cases of OP. The OP has significantly reduced operative time (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 59.00; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 41.15 to 76.85; P < 0.00001) and higher stent placement rate (odds ratio [OR] = 5.97; 95% CI = 3.17 to 11.26; P < 0.00001) compared with LP, whereas the duration of hospital stay was shorter in the LP group (WMD= -0.40; 95% CI= -0.77 to -0.03; P = 0.03). No difference was observed between LP and OP regarding complications (OR = 0.78; 95% CI = 0.46 to 1.34; P = 0.37) or success rate (OR= 1.76; 95% CI = 0.71 to 4.36; P = 0.22). Conclusions: LP is a minimally invasive, safe, and effective therapy method for UPJ obstruction in children, with shorter hospital stay and excellent outcomes, and without additional risk of postoperative complications. Because of the publishing bias, a series of RCTs are necessary to explore the efficiencies of LP in the management of UPJ obstruction in children.