Literature DB >> 21774666

The clinical research office of the endourological society percutaneous nephrolithotomy global study: staghorn versus nonstaghorn stones.

Mahesh Desai1, Antonello De Lisa, Burak Turna, Jorge Rioja, Helena Walfridsson, Alessandro D'Addessi, Carson Wong, Jean Rosette On Behalf Of The Croes Pcnl Study Group.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The study compared characteristics and outcomes in patients with staghorn or nonstaghorn stones who were treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) within the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society (CROES) PCNL Global Study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data over a 1-year period from consecutively treated patients from 96 centers worldwide were collated. The following variables in patients with staghorn or nonstaghorn stones were compared: National prevalence, patient characteristics, access method, puncture frequency and outcomes, including bleeding rates, operative time, and duration of hospital stay.
RESULTS: Data from 5335 eligible patients were collated; 1466 (27.5%) with staghorn and 3869 (72.5%) with nonstaghorn stones. Staghorn stone presentation varied between centers from 67% in Thailand to 13% in Argentina. The frequencies of previous procedures were similar between groups, but shockwave lithotripsy was less frequent in patients with staghorn stones compared with nonstaghorn (16.8% vs 22.6%) and positive preoperative urine cultures were more frequent in patients with staghorn than nonstaghorn stones (23.4% vs 13.1%). Patients with staghorn stones underwent multiple punctures more frequently than those with nonstaghorn stones (16.9% vs 5.0%). Postoperative fever, bleeding, and the need for blood transfusion were more frequent, the median operative time and duration of hospital stay were longer, while the proportion of patients remaining stone free was lower (56.9% vs 82.5%) in patients with staghorn than nonstaghorn stones.
CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of patients with staghorn stones varies widely between centers. Stone-free rates were lower, complications more frequent, and operative time and hospital stay were longer in patients with staghorn stones.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21774666     DOI: 10.1089/end.2011.0055

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endourol        ISSN: 0892-7790            Impact factor:   2.942


  38 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

2.  Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for staghorn stones: Which nomogram can better predict postoperative outcomes?

Authors:  Stavros Sfoungaristos; Ofer N Gofrit; Dov Pode; Ezekiel H Landau; Mordechai Duvdevani
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-12-11       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 3.  Review on renal recovery after anatrophic nephrolithotomy: Are we really healing our patients?

Authors:  Leonardo de Albuquerque Dos Santos Abreu; Douglas Gregório Camilo-Silva; Gustavo Fiedler; Gustavo Barboza Corguinha; Matheus Miranda Paiva; João Antonio Pereira-Correia; Valter José Fernandes Muller
Journal:  World J Nephrol       Date:  2015-02-06

4.  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

5.  Panlithiasis of the urinary tract: a case for open lithotomy in the modern era.

Authors:  Panagiotis Christopoulos; Goran Fryad; Andreas Bourdoumis; Georgios Papadopoulos; Stefanos Kachrilas; Junaid Masood; Noor Buchholz
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2013-11-08       Impact factor: 3.436

6.  Evaluation of stone volume distribution in renal collecting system as a predictor of stone-free rate after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a retrospective single-center study.

Authors:  Hasan Anıl Atalay; Lutfi Canat; Recep Bayraktarlı; Ilter Alkan; Osman Can; Fatih Altunrende
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2017-06-23       Impact factor: 3.436

7.  Treatment of upper urinary calculi with Chinese minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a single-center experience with 12,482 consecutive patients over 20 years.

Authors:  Guohua Zeng; Zanlin Mai; Zhijian Zhao; Xun Li; Wen Zhong; Jian Yuan; Kaijun Wu; Wenqi Wu
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2013-04-25       Impact factor: 3.436

8.  Single lower calyceal percutaneous tract combined with flexible nephroscopy: A valuable treatment paradigm for staghorn stones.

Authors:  Stavros Sfoungaristos; Ioannis Mykoniatis; Ioannis Katafigiotis; Ayman Isid; Ofer N Gofrit; Constantinos A Constantinides; Mordechai Duvdevani
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 1.862

9.  Stone scattering during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: role of renal anatomical characteristics.

Authors:  Alireza Aminsharifi; Ali Eslahi; Ali Reza Safarpour; Sasan Mehrabi
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2014-07-16       Impact factor: 3.436

10.  The management of large staghorn renal stones by percutaneous versus laparoscopic versus open nephrolithotomy: a comparative analysis of clinical efficacy and functional outcome.

Authors:  Alireza Aminsharifi; Dariush Irani; Mansour Masoumi; Bahman Goshtasbi; Amirhossein Aminsharifi; Reza Mohamadian
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2016-03-31       Impact factor: 3.436

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.