A Comparison of Continuous and Interrupted Suturing in Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty

Laparoscopic pyeloplasty is one of the most common reconstructive procedures performed by urologists. Both continuous and interrupted sutures are being practiced for ureteropelvic anastomosis. The success rate and the complications associated with the suturing technique needs evaluation. We analyzed the results from of our patients who underwent laparoscopic pyeloplasty using both techniques.To review the outcome differences among patients undergoing laparoscopic pyeloplasty regarding suturing technique.All patients who underwent laparoscopic, transperitoneal dismembered pyeloplasty of the primary pelviureteric obstruction were analyzed. The primary outcome was successful pyeloplasty, as assessed by the resolution of symptoms and T½<10 minutes. The secondary outcomes were the complication rate and the operative parameters. The difference in the parameters was assessed by Student t test analysis.Of the 107 patients we studied, 65 had interrupted suturing and 42 had continuous suturing. The success rate was not significantly different among the 2 groups. The mean suturing time, postoperative drainage volume, postoperative hospital stay, and total cost of the procedure were significantly less in the continuous suturing group.The continuous suturing technique is preferred over the interrupted suturing technique for laparoscopic pyeloplasty because the success rates are equal and the postoperative stay, suturing time, drain output, and cost of the procedure are better.