Literature DB >> 23635397

Experience of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of large impacted proximal ureteral stones.

Qilai Long1, Jianming Guo, Zhibing Xu, Yuanfeng Yang, Hang Wang, Yanjun Zhu, Yongkang Zhang, Guomin Wang.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of mini- percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in the treatment of large impacted proximal ureteral stones.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of 163 patients who underwent mini-PCNL between January 2006 and August 2010. Mean age was 48.6 years and mean stone size was 18.4 mm. Hydronephrosis and/or hydroureterosis appeared in all patients. In the prone position, percutaneous access (16-Fr sheath) was established by placement of an access needle into the intended calyx under fluoroscopic guidance or combined with ultrasound guidance for complete obstruction by stones while the contrast agent cannot transit. Pneumatic or ultrasonic probes were used throughout ureterorenoscopy for lithotripsy. The ureteral stents and nephrostomy tube were placed at the end of the procedure. Mean drop in hemoglobin, operative time, success rate, hospital stay, and complications were assessed.
RESULTS: Mini-PCNL operations were performed successfully in all patients. Mean operation time was 37 min. Mean postoperative hospital stay was 3.6 days. All cases were followed up for 6-20 months. No major complications like hemorrhage, perforation or organic injury were noted during the operation or postoperatively. The stone-free rate in all patients was 95.7%. Calculus had no recurrence during the follow-up period. Hydronephrosis and hydroureterosis disappeared or were relieved.
CONCLUSIONS: Mini-PCNL is a safe and effective therapy for large impacted proximal ureteral stones.
Copyright © 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23635397     DOI: 10.1159/000343668

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


  10 in total

Review 1.  Minituriazed percutaneous nephrolithotomy: what does it mean?

Authors:  W Kamal; P Kallidonis; I Kyriazis; E Liatsikos
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2016-04-15       Impact factor: 3.436

Review 2.  Mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of renal and upper ureteral stones: Lessons learned from a review of the literature.

Authors:  Nikolaos Ferakis; Marios Stavropoulos
Journal:  Urol Ann       Date:  2015 Apr-Jun

3.  Ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) versus standard PCNL: A randomised clinical trial.

Authors:  Ramin Haghighi; Hossein Zeraati; Maryam Ghorban Zade
Journal:  Arab J Urol       Date:  2017-11-12

4.  Rigid ureteroscopic lithotripsy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy for large proximal ureteral stones: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Qing Wang; Jiachao Guo; Henglong Hu; Yuchao Lu; Jiaqiao Zhang; Baolong Qin; Yufeng Wang; Zongbiao Zhang; Shaogang Wang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-02-09       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 5.  Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy improves stone-free rates for impacted proximal ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zi-Ming Gao; Shan Gao; Hong-Chen Qu; Kai Li; Ning Li; Chun-Lai Liu; Xing-Wang Zhu; Yi-Li Liu; Ping Wang; Xiao-Hua Zheng
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-02-02       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Laparoscopic Ureterolithotomy vs Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy for Large Ureteral Stones.

Authors:  Jae Duck Choi; Seong Il Seo; Joonbeom Kwon; Bum Soo Kim
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2019 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.172

7.  Comparison of antegrade percutaneous versus retrograde ureteroscopic lithotripsy for upper ureteric calculus for stone clearance, morbidity, and complications.

Authors:  Amilal Bhat; Vikash Singh; Mahakshit Bhat; Nikhil Khandelwal; Akshita Bhat
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2019 Jan-Mar

8.  In situ Management of Large Upper Ureteric Calculus by Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in the Era of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery.

Authors:  Sanjay Prakash Jayaprakash; Mathisekaran Thangarasu; Nitesh Jain; Sandeep Bafna; Rajesh Paul
Journal:  Res Rep Urol       Date:  2020-12-10

9.  Development and validation of a preoperative nomogram for predicting patients with impacted ureteral stone: a retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Chenglu Wang; Lu Jin; Xinyang Zhao; Boxin Xue; Min Zheng
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2021-10-08       Impact factor: 2.264

10.  Comparison of retrograde ureterorenoscopy (URS) and percutaneous anterograde ureteroscopy for removal of impacted upper ureteral stones >10mm in the elderly population.

Authors:  Mehmet İlker Gökce; Çağri Akpinar; Khaled Obaid; Evren Süer; Ömer Gülpinar; Yaşar Bedük
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2021 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.541

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.