OBJECTIVE To compare outcomes between robotic pyeloplasty (RP) and standard laparoscopic pyeloplasty (LP) in the infant population for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction. METHODS We performed a retrospective cohort study of all children under 1 year of age who underwent RP or LP at two different medical centers between October 2009 and February 2016. Patient demographics, perioperative data, complications, and results were reviewed. RESULTS Thirteen patients underwent standard LP, and 21 patients underwent RP during the study period. Median age and median weight at time of operation for the whole cohort were 6.1 months and 7.9 kg. Surgery success rates were similar with 95% and 92% in RP and LP, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in operating time between the 2 groups, with a median time of 156 minutes in RP (range 125-249) and 192 minutes (range 98-229) in standard LP (P = .35). Median length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the robotic group with a median stay of 1 day (range 1-3) and 7 days (range 7-12) in the standard LP group.(P < .0001) Drains or nephrostomy tubes were used more often in the laparoscopic group (100%, 13/13) as opposed to RP (9.5%, 2/21, P < .0001) There was a comparable complication rate between the 2 groups, 30.8% for LP and 23.8% for RP (P = .65). CONCLUSIONS The minimally invasive dismembered pyeloplasty is safe and effective in the infant population and produces high success rates. The results, complication rates, and operative time were comparable between the two surgical methods while the standard LP demonstrated longer hospital stay. Both the robotic approach and the LP can be successfully utilized for the benefit of infants with UPJ obstruction.