Scar acceptance after pediatric urologic surgery

Searching for the Least Invasive Management of Pelvi-Ureteric Junction Obstruction in Children: A Critical Literature Review of Comparative Outcomes

“…Nevertheless, this held true only provided that there was no apparent medical benefit associated with one of the two procedures. Moreover, the approach did not seem to be a statistically significant factor in patients being pleased or not with the scar appearance in the study by Wang et al (44).…”

“…Although operative time seems statistically shorter in the open group and length of stay seems shorter in the laparoscopic group, the choice should be based on family preference for incision aesthetics and surgeon comfort with either approach, rather than more classically objective outcome measures (43). In this respect, Wang et al confirmed that larger initial incisions tend to grow more; therefore, at the same follow-up interval, laparoscopic incisions are smaller than those of open procedures (44). Barbossa et al studied family preferences based on the assessment of pictures and diagrams of the scars of open pyeloplasty and RALP (45).…”

Patient-reported physical and psychosocial significance of abdominal scarring in anorectal malformations

“…Twenty-seven eligible patients, 13 (48%) females and 14 (52%) males with a median age of 12 (5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24) years, participated in the study.…”

“…Scars following surgical procedures in infancy and childhood are permanent and reported to grow with the child and adolescent [15,16]. In contrast to the numerous long-term outcome reports on bowel-, urinary-and sexual function in patients with ARM [13,14,[17][18][19][20][21][22][23], physical and psychosocial significance of abdominal scarring has barely been acknowledged in this patient group.…”

Commentary: Early Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty for Infants Under 3 Months With Severe Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction

“…The use of minimally invasive approach, and in particular the robotic one, to treat benign conditions in the pediatric urology field has tremendously expanded over the last few years with increasing consistent evidence showing comparable successful rate to the open treatment ( 2 , 3 ) while offering decreased surgical morbidity and better cosmetic result ( 4 ). Moreover, as witnessed by several investigations, the indications for robotic correction of ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) has widened and comprised smaller (<15 kg) and younger (<1 year) infants ( 5 , 6 ).…”