Kommentar zu Kosmetik nach offener, laparoskopischer und Roboter-assistierter Pyeloplastik

• Literatur

• 1 Cundy TP, Harling L, Hughes-Hallett A. et al. Meta-analysis of robot-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic and open pyeloplasty in children. BJU Int 2014; 114: 582-594
• 2 Gatti JM, Amstutz SP, Bowlin PR. et al. Laparoscopic vs Open Pyeloplasty in Children: Results of a Randomized, Prospective, Controlled Trial. J Urol 2017; 197: 792-797
• 3 Mei H, Pu J, Yang C. et al. Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endourol 2011; 25: 727-736
• 4 Silay MS, Spinoit AF, Undre S. et al. Global minimally invasive pyeloplasty study in children: Results from the Pediatric Urology Expert Group of the European Association of Urology Young Academic Urologists working party. J Pediatr Urol 2016; 12: 229.e1-229.e7
• 5 Wang MK, Li Y, Selekman RE. et al. Scar acceptance after pediatric urologic surgery. J Pediatr Urol 2018; 14: 175.e1-175.e6