Indian Journal of Urology Users online:3548  
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 : 2007  |  Volume : 23  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 12-13

Which surgery is 'best' for patients with PUJ obstruction in a poorly functioning kidney?

Department of Urology, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne. NE7 7DN, United Kingdom

Correspondence Address:
Rob Pickard
Department of Urology, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne. NE7 7DN
United Kingdom
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0970-1591.30256

Rights and Permissions


How to cite this article:
Pickard R. Which surgery is 'best' for patients with PUJ obstruction in a poorly functioning kidney?. Indian J Urol 2007;23:12-3

How to cite this URL:
Pickard R. Which surgery is 'best' for patients with PUJ obstruction in a poorly functioning kidney?. Indian J Urol [serial online] 2007 [cited 2022 Aug 17];23:12-3. Available from:

Expert opinion backed by an evidence base of limited quantity and quality would suggest that dismembered pyeloplasty using an open or laparoscopic approach represents optimum treatment for patients with primary PUJ obstruction.[1] For those with impaired function of the affected renal unit, the situation is less clear, with pyeloplasty, endoluminal techniques and nephrectomy all being advocated. To decide which is the best, an adequately powered randomized study would be required with appropriate pre-stated outcome variables, including symptomatic and functional results together with long-term nephrectomy rate. The data obtained would then allow a cost-effectiveness analysis to determine which management strategy gave the best trade-off between patient benefit and cost reduction. In the continued absence of such data, patients will have to rely on the opinion of their clinician, who will take into account the clinical assessment, past surgical experience and relevant information from the literature. Although the current paper[2] scores low on the quality of evidence, it does provide interesting reading that will help shape such opinion. Of particular note are the following: It seems sensible to base treatment on the GFR of the affected kidney rather than the percentage split function, and the symptomatic results of dismembered pyeloplasty are encouraging in the short term. Endoluminal incision was less effective although morbidity and, probably, costs were lower. Objectively functional preservation was achieved in the short term by both techniques, but one would suspect that further deterioration and subsequent nephrectomy would be seen in some patients in the longer term. In summary it is an interesting audit within a single institution, but management decisions for such patients will still have to rely more on the art rather than science of medicine.

   References Top

1.Klingler HC, Remzi M, Janetschek G, Kratzik C, Marberger MJ. Comparison of open versus laparoscopic pyeloplasty techniques in treatment of uretero-pelvic junction obstruction. Eur Urology 2003;44:340-5.   Back to cited text no. 1    
2.Comparison of endopyelotomy and laparoscopic pyeloplasty for poorly functioning kidneys with ureteropelvic junction obstruction.  Back to cited text no. 2    

This article has been cited by
1 A rare case of abdominal mass with 24 weeks pregnancy
Saeed, M. and Rana, T. and Iqbal, S.R.
Pakistan Journal of Medical and Health Sciences. 2011; 5(1): 197-199


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 (85 KB)
    Citation Manager
    Access Statistics
    Reader Comments
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  


 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded271    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal