scholarly journals Comparative study of laparoscopic pyelolithotomy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the management of large renal pelvic stones

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (3-4) ◽  
pp. E171-175 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasser M. Haggag ◽  
Gamal A. Morsy ◽  
Magdy M. Badr ◽  
Abdel Baset A. Al Emam ◽  
Mourad M. Mourad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy ◽  
University Hospitals ◽  
Patient Demographics ◽  
Laparoscopic Pyelolithotomy ◽  
Postoperative Blood Transfusion ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Stone Free Rate ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Free Rate

Background: The aim of the study is to investigate whether laparoscopic pyelolithotomy (LPL) could be used to manage large renal pelvic stones, generally considered excellent indications for percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL).Methods: This study was performed from May 2009 to March 2012 at Al-Azhar University Hospitals (Assiut and Cairo), Egypt. It included two groups of patients with large renal pelvic stones; only patients with stones 2.5 cm2 or greater were included. Group1 included 40 patients treated by PNL and Group 2 included 10 patients treated by LPL. The differences between the two procedures were compared and analyzed.Results: There was no difference between the two groups regarding patient demographics and stone size. There was a statistically significant difference between the groups regarding mean estimated blood loss (65 ± 12.25 [range: 52.75- 77.25] vs. 180 ± 20.74 [range: 159.26- 200.74] mL, p ≤ 0001), mean hospital stay (2.3 ±0.64 [range: 1.66- 2.94] vs. 3.7 ± 1.4 [range: 2.3- 5.1] days, p ≤ 0.006), rate of postoperative blood transfusion (0% vs. 4.8%,p ≤ 0.0024), and stone-free rate (80% vs. 78.6%, p ≤ 0.23). The mean operative time was significantly longer in Group 2 (LPL) (131 ± 22.11 [range: 108.89-153.11) vs. 51.19 ± 24.39 [range: 26.8-75.58] min, p ≤ 0001), respectively.Conclusion: Although PNL is the standard treatment in most cases of renal pelvic stones, LPL is another feasible surgical technique for patients with large renal pelvic stones.

scholarly journals Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus open surgery for treatment of staghorn stones in pediatric patients

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (11-12) ◽  
pp. 906 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmed R. EL-Nahas ◽  
Ahmed A Shokeir ◽  
Ahmed M Shoma ◽  
Ibrahim Eraky ◽  
Osama M Sarhan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
Renal Stones ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Stone Free Rate ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Free Rate ◽  
Staghorn Stones

Introduction: We compare percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and open surgery in the treatment of staghorn stones in children.Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the electronic records of children who underwent treatment for staghorn stones between September 2000 and August 2013. They were divided between Group 1 (patients who underwent PCNL) and Group 2 (patients who underwent open surgery). We compared stone-free and complications rates, need for multiple procedures, and hospital stay.Results: The study included 41 patients (35 boys and 6 girls), with mean age 7.4 ± 3.1 years (range: 2–15). Of these 41 patients, 26 had unilateral renal stone and 15 had bilateral renal stones. The total number of treated renal units was 56: 28 underwent PCNL and 28 underwent open surgery. The complication rate was comparable for both groups (32% for open surgery vs. 28.6%, p = 0.771). Multiple procedures were more needed in PCNL group (60.7% vs. 32% in open surgery, p = 0.032). The stone-free rate was 71.4% after PCNL and 78.6% after open surgery (p = 0.537). A significant difference was observed in shorter hospital stay after PCNL (5 vs. 8.8 days, p < 0.001). Our study’s limitations include its retrospective design and relatively small sample size.Conclusions: For the treatment of staghorn stones in children, PCNL was comparable to open surgery in complication and stone-free rates. PCNL had the advantage of a shorter hospital stay and open surgery showed a decreased need for multiple procedures. 

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic pyelolithotomy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treatment of large renal stones: a meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 030006052098313
Author(s):  
Tie Mao ◽  
Na Wei ◽  
Jing Yu ◽  
Yinghui Lu
Keyword(s):  
Blood Transfusion ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Renal Stones ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Complementary Treatment ◽  
Laparoscopic Pyelolithotomy ◽  
Stone Free Rate ◽  
Free Rate

Background We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic pyelolithotomy (LPL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for treating renal stones larger than 2 cm. Methods We searched the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, SinoMed, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure databases for studies that compared the surgical outcomes of LPL and PCNL. We conducted a meta-analysis of the retrieved studies, expressed as weighted mean difference or risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Results We included 25 studies (1831 patients). LPL was associated with a significantly higher stone-free rate, lower rates of blood loss, complementary treatment, blood transfusion, and complications, and less reduction in hemoglobin level compared with PCNL. LPL and PCNL were similar in terms of duration of hospital stay, conversion rate, changes in glomerular filtration rate and creatinine level, and mean time of postoperative analgesia. However, LPL was associated with a longer operation time than PCNL. Conclusion LPL appears to be more effective and safer than PCNL in patients with large renal stones, by increasing the stone-free rate and reducing blood loss, complementary treatment, blood transfusion, and complications compared with PCNL. LPL may thus be a useful modality for treating patients with large renal stones.

Percutaneous-Based Management of Staghorn Calculi in Solitary Kidney: Combined Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy versus Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery

2014 ◽  
Vol 94 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wen Zhong ◽  
Zhijian Zhao ◽  
Liang Wang ◽  
Sunil Swami ◽  
Guohua Zeng
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Solitary Kidney ◽  
Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery ◽  
Staghorn Calculi ◽  
Combined Use ◽  
Stone Free Rate ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Free Rate ◽  
Group 1

Introduction: Mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) are well-established techniques with little morbidity. The combined use of standard PCNL and the mini-PCNL or the RIRS technique was evaluated and compared to investigate their own role in the management of staghorn calculi in solitary kidney. Materials and Methods: 23 patients received combined standard PCNL and mini-PCNL (group 1), and 22 patients received combined standard PCNL and RIRS (group 2). The treatment results and complications were evaluated and compared. Results: The mean operation time was 128.8 ± 9.1 min in group 1 and 109.8 ± 10.7 min in group 2 (p < 0.001). The decrease in hemoglobin level in group 1 was significantly higher than that in group 2 (3.5 ± 0.6 vs. 2.1 ± 0.5 g/dl, p < 0.001). The final stone-free rate was significantly higher (p = 0.038) in group 2 (90.9%) than in group 1 (65.2%). Conclusions: Combined standard PCNL and RIRS technique can extract the majority of staghorn calculi quickly by PCNL with EMS Lithoclast, and RIRS used simultaneously can reduce the need for multiple tracts and therefore reduce blood loss and potential morbidity related to multiple tracts, shorten the operation time and achieve a high stone-free rate.

Laparoscopic pyelolithotomy in patients with previous ipsilateral renal stone surgery

2019 ◽  
pp. 039156031989099
Author(s):  
Mohammad Hadi Radfar ◽  
Mehdi Dadpour ◽  
Nasser Simforoosh ◽  
Abbas Basiri ◽  
Akbar Nouralizadeh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Stone ◽  
Operating Time ◽  
Study Groups ◽  
Transfusion Rate ◽  
Renal Surgery ◽  
Laparoscopic Pyelolithotomy ◽  
Stone Free Rate ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
History Of ◽  
Free Rate

Objectives: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of transperitoneal laparoscopic pyelolithotomy in renal stone cases with previous renal surgeries. Patients and methods: In this prospective study, 190 consecutive patients with renal stones, who were candidates for transperitoneal laparoscopic pyelolithotomy, were enrolled. The patients were divided into two groups. In group A, 163 patients without a history of renal surgery underwent standard laparoscopic pyelolithotomy, whereas in group B laparoscopic pyelolithotomy was performed in 27 patients with a history of kidney stone surgery including percutaneous nephrolithotomy or open stone surgery. All intraoperative data including the operating time and complications such as bleeding requiring transfusion were recorded. Postoperative data such as length of hospitalization, hemoglobin level alteration, and other complications were also recorded. Results: There was no significant difference in the preoperative data such as stone size, stone site, age, sex, and stone side between the two groups. There was no significant difference in the stone-free rate between the two groups (p = 0.4). There was no significant difference between the two study groups regarding the operating time, hospital stay, stone-free rate, complications, and transfusion rate. Conclusion: Laparoscopic pyelolithotomy can be used as a safe and feasible treatment modality in the setting of previous renal surgery. The complications and stone-free rate of laparoscopic pyelolithotomy in patients with history of renal surgery are acceptable.

scholarly journals The Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy with Different Access Sizes for the Single Renal Stone ≤25 mm: A Randomized Prospective Study

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Weimin Yu ◽  
Yuan Ruan ◽  
Zhuang Xiong ◽  
Yunlong Zhang ◽  
Ting Rao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Stone Free Rate ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy ◽  
Free Rate

<b><i>Objectives:</i></b> The aim of this study was to provide a randomized controlled trial comparing the outcomes of different access sizes used in the solo ultrasonic-guided minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL). <b><i>Methods:</i></b> From January 2018 to December 2019, a total of 160 cases with single renal stones of &#x3c;25 mm were randomized to undergo mini-PCNLs with Fr16, Fr18, Fr20, or Fr22 accesses. All accesses were established with the axis of the target calyx as the marker for puncture location and then expanded to the desired size. Hemoglobin reduction, operative time, stone-free rate, complications, etc., were all recorded and assessed. <b><i>Results:</i></b> The demographic data were similar, and there were no significantly intergroup differences in stone-free rate, complications, and hospital stay time. The hemoglobin reduction was comparable and was 0.9 ± 0.6, 0.9 ± 0.7, 1.0 ± 0.5, and 1.1 ± 0.7 g/dL for the groups Fr16, Fr18, Fr20, and Fr22, respectively. The operative time was 53.4 ± 14.5, 48.5 ± 15.2, 42.8 ± 13.3, and 43.3 ± 13.1 min for the 4 groups, which decreased significantly from group Fr16 to Fr20, but there was no significant difference between Fr20 and Fr22 groups. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> The axis of target calyx is a reliable marker for establishment of percutaneous renal access under ultrasonic guidance. The surgical outcomes of different access sizes were comparable, but the operation time was significantly shortened with the increase of size. However, Fr22 was not more efficient than Fr20.

scholarly journals Comparative Study of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Supine and Prone Positions

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 154-157
Author(s):  
Anup Chapagain ◽  
Robin Bahadur Basnet ◽  
Chitaranjan Shah ◽  
Arvind Kumar Shah ◽  
Parash Mani Shrestha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Prone Position ◽  
Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy ◽  
Supine Position ◽  
Operative Duration ◽  
Stone Free Rate ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Free Rate ◽  
Group 1

Background: The aim of the study is the compare efficacy and safety of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in supine and prone positions. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy is conventionally performed in prone position but in recent years numbers of supine percutaneous nephrolithotomies is increasing globally.Methods: The hospital based cross-sectional observational study was conducted in the Department of Urology, Bir Hospital from July 2018 to January 2020. A total of 81 consecutive patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy were divided into two groups, with 38 patients in Supine (Group 1) and 43 patients in Prone (Group 2) positions, respectively. Patient’s demographics, access time, operative duration, stone free rate, radiation dose and duration, irrigation fluid volume, post-operative hemoglobin drop and complications were compared.Results: Demographic and stone characteristics were comparable in both groups. Supine Group (Group 1) had significantly shorter operative duration than Prone Group (Group 2), 44.63 ± 12.44minsvs 53.02 ±12.67mins (p< 0.04). The mean radiation duration was 99.11 ± 61.17secs in Group 1 and 108.40 ± 51.65 secs in Group 2 (p=0.46), respectively. Although the mean radiation dose was lower in Group 1 (375.1µGym2) than in Group 2 (465.7 µGym2), it was not statistically significant(p=0.24). The stone free rate at 1 month duration were comparable with 92.1% and 93.02% in Group 1 and Group 2 respectively (p=0.16). Overall complication rates were similar in both groups (15.7% in Group 1 vs 16.2% in Group 2), respectively. None of the patients in both groups had complications higher than Clavien IIIa.Conclusions: PCNL in supine position has significantly shorter operative time with similar complications and stone free rates as compared to prone position.Keywords: percutaneous nephrolithotomy; prone position; supine position

scholarly journals Prediction of Surgical Outcome after Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy through Guy’s Score and Nephrolithometric Nomogram

QJM ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 113 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
K A Teama ◽  
M I Shabayek ◽  
T I S Aly
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy ◽  
Scoring Systems ◽  
Renal Stones ◽  
University Hospitals ◽  
Stone Clearance ◽  
Stone Free Rate ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Free Rate

Abstract Background Urolithiasis has a well documented common occurrence in the general population. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), has prevailed over other more morbid procedures, like open surgeries in the management of such stones PNL in complex renal stones is a challenging procedure because it requires considerable experience in gaining percutaneous tracts, performing delicate and judicious intrarenal manipulations, mastering all techniques of intracorporeal stone disintegration, and weighing the benefits of complete stone clearance against the risks of complications. Aim of the Work GSS and Nephrolithometric Nomogram. Scoring system in predicting PCNL outcomes. The ability of the GSS and STONE score to correlate with the post-operative change in the quality of life. Patients and Methods In a non-randomized prospective study we evaluated the two scoring systems Guy’s and S.T.O.N.E. nephrolithometry scoring systems in predicting the success rate of PCNl and the quality of life. This study included 100 patients with renal stones who were scheduled for PCNL at El Demerdash University Hospitals and Nasser institute hospital in the period from April 2017 to October 2018. Results Our study included 100 patients (34 were female, 66 were male) with a mean age of 46.16 (range from 28 to 68). The mean GUY score was 1.57± 0.73 and the mean STONE score was 5.76± 1.19.the overall stone free rate was 89% with a complication rate of 18% with a mean stone burden &lt;400 mm.GUY and STONE score were able to predict SFR and complications after PCNL. Conclusion Both GSS and S.T.O.N.E Nephrolithometry Score can be used to stratify the complexity of renal stone before PCNL to predict the stone clearance and complication. Both can be valuable tools for providing uniformity for comparison of outcome, proper planning of the surgery and preoperative counseling of the patient.

scholarly journals THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ULTRASONIC LITHOTRIPTOR COMPARED TO COMBINED ULTRASONIC AND PNEUMATIC LITHOTRIPTOR IN PERCUTANEOUS NEPHROLITHOTOMY (PCNL) SURGERY: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-186
Author(s):  
Anggana Suryatmana ◽  
Doddy M. Soebadi ◽  
Tarmono Djojodimedjo
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Model ◽  
Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Random Effect ◽  
Combination Group ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Stone Free Rate ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Free Rate

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of the ultrasonic lithotriptor compared to the combined ultrasonic-pneumatic lithotriptor in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Material & Methods: A systematic search was conducted focusing on studies evaluating nephrolithiasis patients who underwent PCNL using pneumatic, ultrasonic, ultrasonic-pneumatic, or laser lithotriptor. The search was conducted in the PUBMED and Science-direct databases from early to September 2020. Results: There were 406 journals in the initial search. On further selection, 3 randomized controlled trials (RCT) were obtained, with a total of 251 patients. The stone-free rate of three studies had low heterogeneity, I2=0% (P=0.34), so a fixed effect statistical model was used. There was no significant difference (P=0.44) between the stone-free rates from the ultrasonic lithotriptor group and the combination with an odds ratio of 1.26 (95% CI = 0.70-2.26). High heterogeneity was obtained with I2=71% (P=0.03) for the mean fragmentation time, so random effect statistical model was used. There was no significant difference (P=0.56) between the mean fragmentation time of the ultrasonic lithotriptor and combination group with a mean difference of -3.69 (95% CI = -16.09-8.71). Conclusion: The ultrasonic lithotriptor did not have a significant difference in stone-free rate, and mean fragmentation time compared to the combined ultrasonic-pneumatic lithotriptor in PCNL. More RCT studies are needed.  

scholarly journals Comparison of the most popular methods for predicting stonefree rate after percutaneous nephrolithotomy

2017 ◽  
Vol 77 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodrigo Ugalde-Resano ◽  
Christian Isaac Villeda-Sandoval ◽  
Elisa Kobashi-Sandoval ◽  
José Alejandro Rivera-Ramírez ◽  
Manuel Alexis Vargas-Robles ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy ◽  
Scoring System ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Scoring Systems ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
Predictive Capacity ◽  
Residual Stone ◽  
Stone Free Rate ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Free Rate

BACKGROUND: The Guy’s stone score, S.T.O.N.E. nephrolithometry, CROES nomogram, and S-ReSC scoring system have recently been externally validated as effective predictors of stone-free rate after percutaneous nephrolithotomy.OBJECTIVE: We describe herein the advantages of identifying the most accurate scale and propose its standardized use.MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed 188 patients that underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy for kidney stones within the time frame of October 2010 and July 2015 at a tertiary care referral center. Preoperative and postoperative non-contrast computed tomography scans were used in all patients to compare the four scoring systems, using the strict criterion of absolute absence of residual stone as the stone-free rate.RESULTS: The overall stone-free rate was 57.9%. All scoring systems presented a statistically significant stone-free rate (p<0.001). Only the Guy’s stone score had no correlation with postoperative complications. The four scoring systems had similar accuracy, none of them were more predictive for stone-free rate than the other, and there was no significant difference in the areas under the curve between them (p=0.2). In addition, each scale had a correlation with operative time and length of hospital stay.CONCLUSIONS: The four scales analyzed were excellent predictors for stone-free rate. They had similar receiver operating characteristic curves and areas under the curve, with no significant differences between them. However, the Guy’s stone score presented the best predictive capacity and the S-ReSC scoring system was the best method for predicting complications. It is up to the urologic community to decide which evidence-based scale is the most suitable. Meanwhile, the need for a standardized method continues to grow. KEYWORDS: Stone-free rate; Percutaneous nephrolithotomy; CROES; S-ReSC, S.T.O.N.E.; Guy’s stone score

scholarly journals Evaluation and comparison of S.T.O.N.E. and Guy’s scoring systems for predicting percutaneous nephrolithotomy outcomes in supine position

2022 ◽  
pp. 039156032110376
Author(s):  
Ahmet Arıman ◽  
Erkan Merder ◽  
Erdem Toprak
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy ◽  
Supine Position ◽  
Scoring Systems ◽  
Renal Stones ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Residual Stone ◽  
Stone Free Rate ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Operation Duration ◽  
Free Rate

Background: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) was applied in the prone position until recently. But also, in recent years supine positions was applied in patients with kidney stones. Predicting how much renal stones can be cleared after surgery and possibility of complications is an important question for both surgeons and patients. Therefore different scoring systems are used to evaluate outcomes of PCNL before surgery. Patients and methods: Between 2018 and 2020, 80 patients with renal stone who underwent PCNL in the supine position were evaluated preoperatively by S.T.O.N.E. and Guy’s scoring systems (GSS). The predictions of both scoring systems for stone-free and complication rates in patients who underwent PCNL in the supine position were evaluated. Also, these scoring systems were compared among themselves for reliability. Result: In both scoring systems, there was a statistically significant difference between postoperative stone-free (SF) and residual stone (RS) of patients and in predicting the likelihood of complications in patients. No statistically significant difference was found between the two scoring systems in predicting the stone-free rate. Conclusion: Our findings revealed that S.T.O.N.E. nephrolithometry and Guy’s score systems can be used effectively to predict stone-free rate, complications, and operation duration in supine position PCNL for renal stones.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document