0
0
0
0
Smart Citations
0
0
0
0
Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
View Citations

See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

Robotic pyeloplasty: Technological global panacea or geo-surgical nightmare?

Authors

To the Editor,
Pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction (PUJO) is a well-recognised clinical entity characterised by functionally significant impairment of drainage of urine at the level of the pelvi-ureteric junction due to extrinsic or intrinsic obstruction and is encountered both by adult and paediatric urologists alike. Management of PUJO has been surgical historically, and the gold standard has been an open Anderson-Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty [...]

Downloads

Citations

Crossref
1
Scopus
0
Panagiotis Nikolinakos, Nikolaos Chatzikrachtis, Abhisekh Chatterjee, Ivo Donkov, Samuel Bishara, Elisavet Kotsi, Ioannis Alexandrou, Nikolaos Zavras, Joseph M Norris (2024)
Comparison of outcomes of open, laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children with ureteropelvic junction obstruction: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open, 14(8), e087519.
10.1136/bmjopen-2024-087519
González ST, Rosito TE, Bujons A, et al. Multicenter comparative study of open, laparoscopic, and robotic pyeloplasty in the pediatric population for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). International Braz J Urol (Internet). 2022; 48:961-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2022.0194
Moretto S, Gandi C, Bientinesi R, et al. Robotic versus Open Pyeloplasty: Perioperative and Functional Outcomes. Journal of Clinical Medicine (Internet). 2023; 12:2538. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12072538
Nadu A, Mottrie A, Geavlete P. Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction: Which Surgical Approach? European Urology Open Science 2009; 8:778-81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eursup.2009.06.014
Sun L, Zhao D, Shen Y, et al. Laparoscopic versus robot-assisted pyeloplasty in infants and young children. Asian J Surg. 2022; 46:868-73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asjsur.2022.09.046
Casella DP, Fox J, Schneck FX, et al. Cost analysis of pediatric Robot-Assisted and laparoscopic pyeloplasty. J Urol 2013; 189:1083-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.08.259
Mjaess G, Diamand R, Aoun F, et al. Cost-analysis of robot-assisted radical cystectomy in Europe: A cross-country comparison. Eur J Surg Oncol 2023; 49:1511-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2022.07.023
Lam K, Clarke J, Purkayastha S, Kinross J. Uptake and accessibility of surgical robotics in England. Int J Med Robot. 2021; 17:1-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.2174

How to Cite

Nikolinakos, P., Chatzikrachtis, N., Donkov, I., Kotsi, E., Antonoglou, G., Alexandrou, I., Zavras, N., & Norris, J. M. (2024). Robotic pyeloplasty: Technological global panacea or geo-surgical nightmare?. Archivio Italiano Di Urologia E Andrologia, 96(1). https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2024.12263