Indian Journal of Urology Users online:226  
Home Current Issue Ahead of print Editorial Board Archives Symposia Guidelines Subscriptions Login 
Print this page  Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size

Year : 2006  |  Volume : 22  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 159

Intubated versus non-intubated pyeloplasty

Department of Urology, Jaslok Hospital, Mumbai, India

Correspondence Address:
Shriram Joshi
Kamala Kunj, 212, Lady Jehangir Road, Matunga, Mumbai
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0970-1591.26579

Rights and Permissions


How to cite this article:
Joshi S. Intubated versus non-intubated pyeloplasty. Indian J Urol 2006;22:159

How to cite this URL:
Joshi S. Intubated versus non-intubated pyeloplasty. Indian J Urol [serial online] 2006 [cited 2023 Jan 27];22:159. Available from:

Dear Sir,

This is a comment on the article written by Prof. Sarin on paediatric pyeloplasty.[1]

I have by and large, not done an intubated pyeloplasty in children in the last 30 years of my practice. I agree with Prof. Sarin that, if he/she has a functioning kidney, the urinary bolus will keep the anastomosis patent without any leak. Steps that he has mentioned in his article have to be meticulously followed, the important ones being- the 6/0 suture material and the limited mobilization of the upper ureter. The only variation from the classical anterolateral, extraperitoneal approach, which I have recently being following, is splitting of abdominal muscles with injection of sensorcaine in the muscles. The postoperative pain is certainly very much less. The patient can go home as soon as the extrarenal drain is removed.

Special indications for stented pyeloplasty in my opinion are:

1. Redopyeloplasty- fibrosis from previous surgery and urinary leak creates an element of poorer blood supply to the upper ureter and pelvic flap. It is safer to use a stent. In the article, Prof Sarin has done one redopyeloplasty without a stent, but I would be reluctant to do so.

2. PUJ obstruction with secondary stones, commonly seen in adolescents. The stones produce local low grade infection and edema. Chances of prolonged drainage is higher in such cases. Also water tight suturing can be difficult due to edema.

3. Giant hydronephrosis with poor function of the kidney: due to long- standing obstruction and poor function, the urinary bolus is not strong enough to keep the anastomosis open and chances of cross union exists in such cases. It will take many months for this kidney to function optimally - if it ever recovers the function!

   References Top

1.Sarin YK. Paediatric pyeloplasty: Intubated vs nonintubated. Indian J Urol 2006;22:35-8.  Back to cited text no. 1    


Print this article  Email this article
Previous article Next article


   Next article
   Previous article 
   Table of Contents
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Article in PDF (76 KB)
    Citation Manager
    Access Statistics
    Reader Comments
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  


 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded121    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal