Literature DB >> 11547050

Critical analysis of supracostal access for percutaneous renal surgery.

R Munver1, F C Delvecchio, G E Newman, G M Preminger.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Percutaneous renal surgery is currently performed for complex renal calculi as well as for various other endourological indications. In many patients an upper pole nephrostomy tract allows direct access to most of the intrarenal collecting system. Upper pole percutaneous access may be obtained via the supracostal or subcostal approach. The preferred route depends on the location and size of the specific stone or lesion. Previously others have cautioned against the supracostal approach above the 12th rib and many have discouraged an approach above the 11th rib due to concern about the increased risk of intrathoracic complications. We retrospectively assessed the morbidity associated with supracostal percutaneous renal surgery and compared and analyzed the morbidity of the supracostal and subcostal approaches.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The records of all patients who underwent upper pole percutaneous renal surgery between November 1993 and July 1999 were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 240 patients underwent percutaneous renal procedures, including 225 for managing symptomatic renal or ureteral stones, that is nonstaghorn calculi in 157, staghorn calculi in 41, proximal ureteral calculi in 12, calculi within a caliceal diverticulum in 6, calculi associated with primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction in 5 and calculi associated with a retained ureteral stent in 4. An additional 15 procedures were done for ureteropelvic junction obstruction (7), intrarenal collecting system tumors (5), a caliceal diverticulum without stones (1), a retained ureteral stent (1) and a ureteral stricture (1).
RESULTS: A total of 300 nephrostomy tracts were placed to obtain access to the intrarenal collecting system via the supracostal approach in 98 (32.7%) cases and the subcostal approach in 202 (67.3%). Of the supracostal approaches 72 (73.5%) tracts were above the 12th and 26 (26.5%) were above the 11th rib. The overall complication rate irrespective of percutaneous approach was 8.3% (16.3% for supracostal and 4.5% for subcostal access). Complications included blood transfusion in 7 patients, intraoperative hemothorax/hydrothorax in 5, sepsis/bacteremia in 3, atrial fibrillation in 2, delayed nephropleural fistula in 2, renal artery pseudoaneurysm in 2, deep venous thrombosis/pulmonary embolus in 2, pneumothorax in 1 and subcapsular hematoma in 1. Seven of 8 intrathoracic complications (87.5%) developed in supracostal cases.
CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous renal surgery remains an important option for managing complex renal calculi and other upper urinary tract lesions. In our experience it is generally associated with low morbidity. The supracostal approach is often preferred for obtaining intrarenal access to complex renal and proximal ureteral pathology. Because supracostal access tracts are associated with significantly higher intrathoracic and overall complication rates compared to subcostal access tracts, this approach must be used with caution when no other alternatives are available.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11547050

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  50 in total

1.  Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for isolated calyceal stones: How important is the stone location?

Authors:  Faruk Özgör; Onur Küçüktopcu; Abdulmuttalip Şimşek; Ömer Sarılar; Murat Binbay; Gökhan Gürbüz
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2015-12

Review 2.  Planning and Execution of Access for Percutaneous Renal Stone Removal in a Community Hospital Setting.

Authors:  Robert M Springer
Journal:  Semin Intervent Radiol       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 1.513

3.  Emergent percutaneous nephrostomy for the diagnosis and management of pyonephrosis.

Authors:  Albert C Li; Sidney P Regalado
Journal:  Semin Intervent Radiol       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 1.513

4.  Flank bulge following supracostal percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A report of 2 cases.

Authors:  Andrea G Lantz; Kenneth T Pace; R John D'A Honey
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.862

5.  Phantom hernia following percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Authors:  S Rajaian; M Pragatheeswarane; K Krishnamurthy
Journal:  J Postgrad Med       Date:  2020 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 1.476

6.  Difficulties with access in percutaneous renal surgery.

Authors:  Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Justin I Friedlander; Brian D Duty; Zeph Okeke; Arthur D Smith
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2011-04

7.  Supracostal access for miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy: comparison of supracostal and infracostal approaches.

Authors:  Faruk Ozgor; Abdulkadir Tepeler; Ismail Basibuyuk; Onur Kucuktopcu; Yunus Kayali; Fatih Yanaral; Murat Binbay
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2017-03-30       Impact factor: 3.436

8.  Construction of a three-dimensional model of renal stones: comprehensive planning for percutaneous nephrolithotomy and assistance in surgery.

Authors:  Hulin Li; Yuanbo Chen; Chunxiao Liu; Bingkun Li; Kai Xu; Susu Bao
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2012-12-08       Impact factor: 4.226

9.  The feasibility of regional anesthesia in the percutaneous nephrolithotomy with supracostal approach and its comparison with general anesthesia.

Authors:  M K Moslemi; S H Mousavi-Bahar; M Abedinzadeh
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2012-12-21       Impact factor: 3.436

10.  Lower pole calculi larger than one centimeter: Retrograde intrarenal surgery.

Authors:  Andreas J Gross; Thorsten Bach
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2008-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.