Literature DB >> 22487016

Categorisation of complications and validation of the Clavien score for percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Jean J M C H de la Rosette1, Dedan Opondo, Francisco P J Daels, Guido Giusti, Alvaro Serrano, Sangam V Kandasami, J Stuart Wolf, Magnus Grabe, Stavros Gravas.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although widely used, the validity and reliability of the Clavien classification of postoperative complications have not been tested in urologic procedures, such as percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).
OBJECTIVE: To validate the Clavien score and categorise complications of PCNL. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data for 528 patients with complications after PCNL were used to create a set of 70 unique complication-management combinations. Clinical case summaries for each complication-management combination were compiled in a survey distributed to 98 urologists, who rated each combination using the Clavien classification. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Interrater agreement for Clavien scores was estimated using Fleiss' kappa (κ). The relationship between Clavien score and the duration of postoperative hospital stay was analysed using multivariate nonlinear regression models that adjusted for operating time, preoperative urine microbial culture, presence of staghorn stone, and use of postoperative nephrostomy tube. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall interrater agreement in grading postoperative complications was moderate (κ=0.457; p<0.001). Agreement was highest for Clavien score 5 and decreased with lower Clavien scores. Higher agreement was found for Clavien scores 3 and 4 than in subcategories of these scores. Postoperative stay increased with higher Clavien scores and was unaffected by inherent differences between study centres. A standard list of post-PCNL complications and their corresponding Clavien scores was created.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the Clavien classification demonstrates high validity, interrater reliability is low for minor complications. To improve the reliability and consistency of reporting adverse outcomes of PCNL, we have assigned Clavien scores to complications of PCNL.
Copyright © 2012 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22487016     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.03.055

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  91 in total

1.  External validation of the S.T.O.N.E. nephrolithometry scoring system.

Authors:  Yasser A Noureldin; Mohamed A Elkoushy; Sero Andonian
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2015 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  Comparison of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy and flexible ureteroscopy for the treatment of intermediate proximal ureteral and renal stones in the elderly.

Authors:  Henglong Hu; Yuchao Lu; Deng He; Lei Cui; Jiaqiao Zhang; Zhenyu Zhao; Baolong Qin; Yufeng Wang; Feng Lin; Shaogang Wang
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2015-12-24       Impact factor: 3.436

3.  Applicability of the Clavien-Dindo grading system for assessing the postoperative complications of endoscopic surgery for nephrolithiasis: a critical review.

Authors:  Farkhad Ataullaevich Akilov; Shukhrat Iskandarovich Giyasov; Shukhrat Tursunovich Mukhtarov; Furkat Raufovich Nasirov; Jakhongir Fatikhovich Alidjanov
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2013-09

4.  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

5.  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

6.  Comparison one-step procedure with two-step procedure in percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Authors:  Szu-Han Chen; Wen-Jeng Wu; Yii-Her Chou; Hsin-Chih Yeh; Chia-Chun Tsai; Kuang-Shun Chueh; Nien-Ting Hou; Siou-Jin Chiu; Hung-Pin Tu; Ching-Chia Li
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2013-11-05       Impact factor: 3.436

7.  Comparison of intraoperative and postoperative complications based on ASA risks in patients who underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Authors:  Hüseyin Buğra Karakaş; İzzet Çiçekbilek; Adem Tok; Tamer Alışkan; Bülent Akduman
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2016-09

Review 8.  The efficacy and safety of percutaneous nephrolithotomy under general versus regional anesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Chunxiao Pu; Jia Wang; Yin Tang; Haichao Yuan; Jinhong Li; Yunjin Bai; Xiaoming Wang; Qiang Wei; Ping Han
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2015-04-30       Impact factor: 3.436

9.  Outcomes of second-look percutaneous nephrolithotomy in renal calculi-a single centre experience.

Authors:  Sumit Kumar; Vilvapathy Senguttuvan Karthikeyan; Ashwin Mallya; Ramaiah Keshavamurthy
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2018-09-01

10.  The feasibility of multiple-tract mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy as an overnight surgery for the treatment of complex kidney stones.

Authors:  Zhijian Zhao; Shanfeng Yin; Huacai Zhu; Donglong Cheng; Yongda Liu; Guohua Zeng
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2020-08-24       Impact factor: 3.436

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.