| Literature DB >> 22013438 |
Abstract
The surgical management of pediatric stone disease has evolved significantly over the last three decades. Prior to the introduction of shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) in the 1980s, open lithotomy was the lone therapy for children with upper tract calculi. Since then, SWL has been the procedure of choice in most pediatric centers for children with large renal calculi. While other therapies such as percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) were also being advanced around the same time, PNL was generally seen as a suitable therapy in adults because of the concerns for damage in the developing kidney. However, recent advances in endoscopic instrumentation and renal access techniques have led to an increase in its use in the pediatric population, particularly in those children with large upper tract stones. This paper is a review of the literature focusing on the indications, techniques, results, and complications of PNL in children with renal calculi.Entities:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22013438 PMCID: PMC3195303 DOI: 10.1155/2011/123606
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Adv Urol ISSN: 1687-6369
Figure 1Triangulation technique for percutaneous access. Fluoroscopic C-arm is moved back and forth between 2 positions, including 1 parallel and 1 oblique to puncture line. A, with C-arm oriented parallel to puncture line, adjustments with access needle (arrows) are made in mediolateral (left/right) direction. Inset, corresponding fluoroscopic image. B, C-arm is rotated to oblique position, and adjustments with access needle are made in cephalad/caudal (up/down) orientation of puncture line. Inset, corresponding fluoroscopic image. (Reprinted with permission from The Journal of Urology, Vol. 178, Miller NL, Matlaga BR, and Lingeman JE. Techniques for Fluoroscopic Percutaneous Renal Access, pp 15–23, Copyright Elsevier 2007.)
Standard products for percutaneous nephrolithotomy.
| Opacification of the collecting system |
| (1) Open ended ureteral catheter either 5 Fr |
| (2) Occlusion balloon catheter 5 Fr |
|
|
| Puncture of calyx |
| (1) 18 gauge needle with either 12 or 20 cm introducer |
|
|
| Guidewire placement |
| (1) 0.035′′ guidewire with straight tip (first wire) |
| (2) 0.035′′ sensor guidewire with straight tip (first wire exchanged for this wire) |
| (3) 8/10 dilator sheath set |
| (4) 0.035′′ superstiff guidewire with straight tip (placed as second wire through 8/10) |
| (5) Torqueable catheters and angled glidewires and guidewires for difficult anatomy |
|
|
| Renal tract dilation/establishment |
| (1) Sequential renal dilation to desired sheath (internal diameter 12–24 Fr) |
| (2) High-pressure balloon dilation with placement of sheath (24–30 Fr) |
|
|
| Renal drainage following procedure |
| (1) Locking loop nephrostomy tubes 10–12 Fr |
| (2) Malecot re-entry catheters 16–24 Fr |
Comparison of pediatric percutaneous nephrolithotomy series DNS: did not specify; aincludes SWL therapy.
| Study | No. children/renal units | Mean age (Yrs) | Mean stone size | Maximum sheath (Fr) | Multiple tracts % | Second look % | Stone-free initial/final % | Transfusion % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aron et al. [ | 19/19 | 4.2 | 972 mm2 | 24 | 74 | 5 | 89/94a | 5 |
| Boormans et al. [ | 23/26 | 7.5 | 6 cm2 | 18 | 8 | 8 | 58/81a | 4 |
| Dawaba et al. [ | 65/72 | 5.9 | 260 mm2 | 30 | 3 | 6 | 86/93a | 1 |
| Gonen et al. [ | 31/31 | 10.4 | 929 mm2 | 30 | 52 | 6 | 61/68 | 23 |
| Guven et al. [ | 17/20 | 1.8 | 19 mm | 28 | 0 | 0 | 95/95 | 5 |
| Kapoor et al. [ | 31/31 | 9.6 | DNS | 30 | 3 | 10 | 74/84 | 0 |
| Mahmud and Zaidi [ | 29/30 | 3.8 | 2.35 cm | DNS | 0 | 0 | 60/100a | 6 |
| Nouralizadeh et al. [ | 20/24 | 3.1 | 33 mm | 26 | 0 | 8 | 79/92a | 5 |
| Özden et al. [ | 51/53 | 9.7 | 654 mm2 | 30 | 40 | 6 | 74/87a | 17 |
| Rizvi et al. [ | 62/62 | DNS | 4.7 cm | 22 | DNS | 0 | 68/95a | 25 |
| Salah et al. [ | 135/138 | 8.9 | 507 mm2 | DNS | DNS | DNS | DNS/99 | 1 |
| Zeren et al. [ | 55/67 | 7.9 | 283 mm2 | 30 | DNS | 11 | DNS/87 | 24 |