Published 2016-03-23
Ginanda Putra Siregar Irfan Wahyudi Chaidir Arif Mochtar Agus Rizal Ardy Hariandy Hamid


Objective: This study was conducted to evaluate the initial experience of retroperitoneoscopy surgery. Material & method: This is a descriptive study with cross-sectional design. Data was collected from medical records of Urology Department in Cipto Mangunkusumo General Hospital Jakarta, from March 2013 until February 2014. Subjects were all patients who performed retroperitoneoscopic surgery between the time periods. Results: Patients consisted of 9 males (42.85%) and 11 females (57.14%). Mean age was 38.95 + 21.88 years old. Proportion based on diagnosis were 5 renal failures (23.8%), 5 ureteral stones (23.8%), 3 renal cysts (14.3%), 2 PUJOs (9.5%), double 3 collecting systems (14.3%), 1 tumor (4.8%), 1 ureteral tumor (4.8%), and 1 renal diverticle (4.8%). Proportion based on kind of retroperitoneoscopy were ureterolithotomy (23.8%), nephrectomy 3 (14.3%), nephroureterectomy 3 (14.3%), renal cyst unroofing 3 (14.3%), heminephrectomy 3 (14.3%), pyeloplasty 2 (9.5%), partial nephrectomy 1 (4.8%), and diverticle coagulation 1 (4.8%). Mean operating time was 178.81 + 55.72 minutes with mean length hospitalization 8.05 + 4.4 days. Mean amount of bleeding was 98 + 69.47 cc, wound operation infection 0 (0%), peritoneal perforation 1 (4.76%), open surgery conversion 2 (9.52%), and transperitoneal laparoscopy conversion 1 (4.76%). Conclusion: In this study, total number of retroperitoneoscopy surgery cases still less than others abroad. Demographic characteristic showed variety than other study. Compared to other studies, the operating time was comparable but the length of stay was longer. We had higher open surgery conversion rate, while another complication was relatively the same.



laparoscopy, retroperitoneal, retroperitoneoscopy, Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital


Keeley FX, Jr., Tolley DA. Retroperitoneal laparoscopy. BJU Int. 1999; 84(2): 212-5.

Freiha FS, Salzman J. Surgical staging of prostatic cancer: Transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal lymphadenectomy. J Urol. 1977; 118(4): 616-7.

Taue R, Izaki H, Koizumi T, Kishimoto T, Oka N, Fukumori T, et al. Transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: A comparative study. Int J Urol. 2009; 16(3): 263-7.

Gaur DD. Laparoscopic operative retroperitoneoscopy: Use of a new device. J Urol. 1992; 148(4): 1137-9.

Turk C, Knoll T, Petrik A, Sarica K, Skolarikos A, Straub M, et al. Guidelines on urolithiasis: Uroweb; 2013 [Januari 5, 2014]. Available from: http://www.uroweb.org/gls/pdf/21_Urolithiasis_LRV4.pdf.

Muslumanoglu AY, Karadag MA, Tefekli AH, Altunrende F, Tok A, Berberoglu Y. When is open ureterolithotomy indicated for the treatment of ureteral stones. Int J Urol. 2006; 13(11): 1385-8.

Yasui T, Okada A, Hamamoto S, Taguchi K, Ando R, Mizuno K, et al. Efficacy of retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for the treatment of large proximal ureteric stones and its impact on renal function. Springer Plus. 2013; 2: 600.

Goel A, Hemal AK. Upper and mid-ureteric stones: A prospective unrandomized comparison of retroperitoneoscopic and open ureterolithotomy. BJU Int. 2001; (7): 679-82.

Berdjis N, Hakenberg OW, Leike S, Zastrow S, Manseck A, Oehlschlager S, et al. Comparison of transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal approach in laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: A single-center experience of 63 cases. Urol Int. 2006; 77(2): 166-9.

Singh V, Sinha RJ, Gupta DK, Kumar M, Akhtar A. Transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy: A prospective randomized comparison study. J Urol. 2013; 189(3): 940-5.

Qin C, Wang S, Li P, Cao Q, Shao P, Li P, et al. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic technique in treatment of complex renal stones: 75 cases. BMC Urol. 2014; 14: 16.

Viterbo R, Greenberg RE, Al-Saleem T, Uzzo RG. Prior abdominal surgery and radiation do not complicate the retroperitoneoscopic approach to the kidney or adrenal gland. J Urol. 2005; 174(2): 446-50.

Negoro H, Shiraishi Y, Sugino Y, Iwamura H, Moroi S, Oka H, et al. [Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma at Kobe City General Hospital]. Actas Urol J. 2005; 51(6): 369-72.

Desai MM, Strzempkowski B, Matin SF, Steinberg AP, Ng C, Meraney AM, et al. Prospective randomized comparison of transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. J Urol. 2005; 173(1): 38-41.

Janetschek G, Peschel R, Altarac S, Bartsch G. Laparoscopic and retroperitoneoscopic repair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Urology. 1996; 47(3): 311-6.

Abuanz S, Game X, Roche JB, Guillotreau J, Mouzin M, Sallusto F, et al. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: comparison between retroperitoneoscopic and transperitoneal approach. J Urol. 2010; 76(4): 877-81.

Matin SF, Gill IS. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: Retroperitoneal versus transperitoneal approach. Current Urology Reports. 2002; 3: 164-71.

Copyright Information
Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine/Airlangga University