Literature DB >> 12740488

Evaluation of fragmentation with single or multiple pulse setting of Lithoclast for renal calculi during percutaneous nephrolithotripsy and its impact on clearance.

A K Hemal1, Apul Goel, Monish Aron, Amlesh Seth, P N Dogra, N P Gupta.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of single or multiple pulse settings of Lithoclast to fragment renal calculi, and its effect on fragment size and clearance.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a prospective study 153 patients, who had been treated over a period of 35 months for renal stone disease by percutaneous nephrolithotomy, were evaluated. In 69 cases the single and in 84 cases the multiple pulse modes were used to fragment the stone intracorporeally using the pneumatic lithoclast. The 2 groups were similar with regard to patient characteristics, stone location and size.
RESULTS: Most stones were staghorn. The lithoclast was effective with good fragmentation in all cases. The mean operating and fluoroscopy times in the single and multiple pulse mode were 124.1 and 5.8, and 141.2 and 7.4 min, respectively (both differences statistically significant, p < 0.001). Immediate postoperatively residual stone fragments were seen in 16 cases with the single and 35 cases with the multiple pulse mode setting (difference statistically significant, p < 0.05). Relook procedures were required in 14 cases with the single and 22 cases with the multiple pulse setting (difference not statistically significant). No specific complication was seen related to the use of either of the two modes. On follow-up 1 patient in the multiple pulse setting developed stone recurrence after 19 months.
CONCLUSIONS: The single pulse mode was associated with controlled fragmentation of the stone, formation of larger fragments which were easier to pick up, less stone scatter, shorter operating time and less exposure to fluoroscopy. The single pulse mode was also associated with statistically less chances of postoperative residual fragments. Copyright 2003 S. Karger AG, Basel

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12740488     DOI: 10.1159/000070132

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urol Int        ISSN: 0042-1138            Impact factor:   2.089


  5 in total

1.  The comparison of laparoscopic pyelolithotomy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of solitary large renal pelvic stones.

Authors:  Ahmet Tefekli; Abdulkadir Tepeler; Tolga Akman; Muzaffer Akçay; Murat Baykal; Mert Ali Karadağ; Ahmet Y Muslumanoglu; Jean de la Rosette
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2012-02-04

2.  Laparoscopic pyelolithotomy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy for a solitary renal pelvis stone larger than 3 cm: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Alireza Aminsharifi; Mohammad-Mehdi Hosseini; Abbasali Khakbaz
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2013-07-23       Impact factor: 3.436

Review 3.  Stone technology: intracorporeal lithotripters.

Authors:  Kymora B Scotland; Tadeusz Kroczak; Kenneth T Pace; Ben H Chew
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2017-06-12       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  Frequency and risk factors for antegrade ureteral stone migration after percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Authors:  Hector S Barba; Christian Isaac Villeda-Sandoval; Carlos E Mendez-Probst
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2020-08-29

Review 5.  Residual fragments after percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Authors:  Kaan Ozdedeli; Mete Cek
Journal:  Balkan Med J       Date:  2012-09-01       Impact factor: 2.021

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.