Robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty in pediatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a meta-analysis of efficacy, safety, and age-stratified outcomes.

To compare the efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted pyeloplasty (RALP) versus conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty (CLP) in pediatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted, including randomized controlled trials and cohort studies from PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library (2000-2025). Outcomes assessed included success rates, operative time, length of hospital stay, intraoperative/postoperative complications and conversion rates. Subgroup analyses stratified patients by age (< 2 vs. ≥ 2 years) and anastomosis time to minimize heterogeneity from variable surgical phase definitions. Risk ratios (RR), mean differences (MD), and odds ratios (OR) were calculated using random-effects models. This meta-analysis of 26 studies (4066 pediatric patients) demonstrated consistent advantages for RALP over CLP. RALP was associated with a 54% lower odds of surgical failure (OR = 0.46, 95% CI 0.22-0.98, P = 0.04) and significantly shorter operative time (mean difference [MD] =  - 17.3 min, 95% CI - 31.2 to - 3.4, P = 0.01), driven by a 28 min reduction in anastomotic time (MD =  - 27.9, 95% CI - 52.9 to - 2.9, P = 0.03). RALP also reduced postoperative complications by 81% (OR = 1.81, 95% CI 1.21-2.69, P = 0.004), with a shorter hospital stay (MD =  - 3.04 days, P < 0.00001). Subgroup analyses revealed stronger benefits in children ≥ 2 years (operative time MD = 17.27 min, P = 0.02), while infants < 2 years showed high heterogeneity (I2 = 91%). Conversion rates were comparable (1.1% vs. 1.0%, P = 0.74). RALP is associated with higher success rates, fewer complications, and shorter hospital stays compared to CLP in pediatric UPJO repair, particularly in older children. Standardized reporting of surgical phases and cost-effectiveness studies are needed to optimize robotic applications across pediatric populations.