Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 26, 2025

Robot-Assisted Kidney Transplantation
Published on: July 19, 2021
Laparoscopic versus robot-assisted pyeloplasty in infants and young children
Long Sun1, Dongyan Zhao1, Yiding Shen1
1Department of Urology, Children's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, National Clinical Research Center for Child Health, Hangzhou, 310000, China.
Insights
Robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) offers a less invasive and faster recovery option for infants and young children with ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO), demonstrating comparable effectiveness to traditional laparoscopic pyeloplasty (LP).
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Urology
- Minimally Invasive Surgery
- Surgical Technology
Background:
- Ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) is a common congenital anomaly in infants and young children.
- Traditional laparoscopic pyeloplasty (LP) is a standard surgical treatment for UPJO.
- Robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) has emerged as an alternative minimally invasive approach.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes of RALP versus LP in pediatric patients with UPJO.
- To evaluate the safety, efficacy, and recovery profiles of both surgical techniques in young children.
Main Methods:
- A retrospective study involving 33 patients (0-36 months) with UPJO who underwent either RALP or LP.
- Data collected included operative time, length of hospital stay, pain management, costs, and short-term complications.
- Anderson-Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty was the surgical procedure performed.
Main Results:
- RALP demonstrated significantly shorter operative times, shorter hospital stays, and earlier drainage tube removal compared to LP.
- Postoperative pain and short-term complications were similar between the two groups.
- Hospitalization costs were significantly higher for RALP compared to LP.
Conclusions:
- RALP is a safe and effective alternative to LP for treating UPJO in infants and young children.
- RALP offers benefits of reduced trauma and faster recovery, with comparable surgical effectiveness to LP.
- Further research may explore long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness of RALP in this pediatric population.
Objective:
To compare the characteristics of conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty (LP) and robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) in infants and young children with ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO).
Methods:
We performed a retrospective study of patients (age: 0-36 months) who underwent dismembered pyeloplasty (Anderson-Hynes) with the fourth-generation RALP or traditional LP between April 2020 and December 2020.
Results:
A total of 33 patients with UPJO were enrolled: 12 underwent RALP (9 left side; 3 right side) and 21 underwent LP (18 left side; 3 right side). In the RALP group, the median patient age was 17 months (range: 5-36 months). In the LP group, the median patient age was 9 months (range: 2-36 months) (P = 0.182). The mean operation times were 120.25 ± 37.54 min (RALP) and 156.10 ± 51.11 min (LP) (P = 0.042), and the mean lengths of hospital stay were 6.42 ± 1.62 days (RALP) and 8.19 ± 2.25 days (LP) (P = 0.023). Removal of the drainage tube was performed after 3.08 ± 0.69 days (RALP) and after 4.76 ± 1.81 days (LP) (P = 0.001). The postoperative pain showed no significant difference. The mean hospitalization costs were 61464.75 ± 2800.53 yuan (RALP) and 22169.52 ± 3442.15 yuan (LP) (P < 0.001). The mean follow-up time was 10-18 months. Significant improvements in the anteroposterior diameter and parenchymal thickness were observed after surgery. Conversion to laparotomy was not performed. No short-term complications occurred during postoperative hospitalization and follow-up.
Conclusion:
RALP has the advantages of less trauma and faster recovery. It can be safely and effectively performed in infants and young children, and its effectiveness is similar to that of traditional LP.
Related Concept Videos
Imaging Studies V: Intravenous Urography and Retrograde Pyelography
Urinary Tract Calculi VI: Surgical Management
Kidney Transplant II: Surgical Procedure

