Literature DB >> 25850962

Evaluation of stone-free rate using Guy's Stone Score and assessment of complications using modified Clavien grading system for percutaneous nephro-lithotomy.

Rajan Kumar Sinha1, Subhabrata Mukherjee, Tarun Jindal, Pramod Kumar Sharma, Barun Saha, Nilanjan Mitra, Jay Kumar, Chandranath Mukhopadhyay, Nabankur Ghosh, Mir Reza Kamal, Soumendra Nath Mandal, Dilip Karmakar.   

Abstract

To prospectively evaluate the ability of Guy's Stone Score (GSS) in predicting stone clearance rate and complication rate (by modified Clavien grade) for renal stones treated by percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL). From January 2013 to June 2014, a total of 142 patients undergoing PNL were evaluated prospectively. Patients with co-morbidities like hypertension, diabetes, renal failure were excluded from the study. All patients were classified according to GSS based on the findings of pre-operative intravenous urography (IVU) and per-operative retrograde pyelography (RGP). All PNL procedures were done by standard technique in prone position and success was defined as no residual stone visible on X-ray KUB done on the third postoperative day. Complications were classified according to modified Clavien grading system. The initial stone clearance rate was 71.1% and overall final stone clearance rate was 90.14%. The complication rate according to Clavien grading system was 40.1%. The final stone clearance rates were 93.9, 85.71, 90.47, and 77.77% in GSS I, II, III, and IV, respectively (p<0.001, <0.05, <0.05 and >0.05, respectively). The Clavien complication rates were 23, 61, 52, and 77.7% in GSS I, II, III, and IV, respectively (p<0.001). The GSS is a simple and easily reproducible system to preoperatively predict stone-free rate and perioperative complication rate. It helps in better patient counseling preoperatively.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25850962     DOI: 10.1007/s00240-015-0769-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urolithiasis        ISSN: 2194-7228            Impact factor:   3.436


  20 in total

Review 1.  Evaluating the definition of "stone free status" in contemporary urologic literature.

Authors:  L A Deters; C M Jumper; P L Steinberg; V M Pais
Journal:  Clin Nephrol       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 0.975

Review 2.  Complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Authors:  Maurice Stephan Michel; Lutz Trojan; Jens Jochen Rassweiler
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2006-10-25       Impact factor: 20.096

3.  Post-percutaneous nephrolithotomy extensive hemorrhage: a study of risk factors.

Authors:  Ahmed R El-Nahas; Ahmed A Shokeir; Ahmed M El-Assmy; Tarek Mohsen; Ahmed M Shoma; Ibrahim Eraky; Mahmoud R El-Kenawy; Hamdy A El-Kappany
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Heterogeneity in the reporting of disease characteristics and treatment outcomes in studies evaluating treatments for nephrolithiasis.

Authors:  Elias S Hyams; Aron Bruhn; Michael Lipkin; Ojas Shah
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.942

5.  Utility of the Guy's stone score based on computed tomographic scan findings for predicting percutaneous nephrolithotomy outcomes.

Authors:  Fabio C Vicentini; Giovanni Scala Marchini; Eduardo Mazzucchi; Joaquim F A Claro; Miguel Srougi
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2014-03-05       Impact factor: 2.649

6.  S.T.O.N.E. nephrolithometry: novel surgical classification system for kidney calculi.

Authors:  Zhamshid Okhunov; Justin I Friedlander; Arvin K George; Brian D Duty; Daniel M Moreira; Arun K Srinivasan; Joel Hillelsohn; Arthur D Smith; Zeph Okeke
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2013-03-26       Impact factor: 2.649

7.  How do increasing stone surface area and stone configuration affect overall outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy?

Authors:  Burak Turna; Mehmet Umul; Serkan Demiryoguran; Baris Altay; Oktay Nazli
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 2.942

8.  Stone burden in an average Swedish population of stone formers requiring active stone removal: how can the stone size be estimated in the clinical routine?

Authors:  Hans-Göran Tiselius; Annika Andersson
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 20.096

9.  Pre- and perioperative predictors of short-term clinical outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy.

Authors:  Peter J Olbert; Axel Hegele; Andres J Schrader; André Scherag; Rainer Hofmann
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2007-09-05

10.  Prospective evaluation of complications using the modified Clavien grading system, and of success rates of percutaneous nephrolithotomy using Guy's Stone Score: A single-center experience.

Authors:  Swarnendu Mandal; Apul Goel; Rohit Kathpalia; Satyanarayan Sankhwar; Vishwajeet Singh; Rahul J Sinha; Bhupender P Singh; Divakar Dalela
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2012-10
View more
  7 in total

1.  Prediction of stone-free status and complication rates after tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a comparative and retrospective study using three stone-scoring systems and preoperative parameters.

Authors:  Sae Woong Choi; Woong Jin Bae; U-Syn Ha; Sung-Hoo Hong; Ji Youl Lee; Sae Woong Kim; Hyuk Jin Cho
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-07-12       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Hospital volume in ureterorenoscopic stone treatment: 99 operations per year could increase the chance of a better outcome-results of the German prospective multicentre BUSTER project.

Authors:  Steffen Lebentrau; Thomas Enzmann; Mike Lehsnau; Frank Christoph; Martin Schostak; Matthias May
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-08-09       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  Preoperative risk factors for complications of percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Authors:  Ahmed R El-Nahas; Mohamed A Nabeeh; Mahmoud Laymon; Khaled Z Sheir; Hamdy A El-Kappany; Yasser Osman
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2020-08-01       Impact factor: 3.436

Review 4.  Current clinical scoring systems of percutaneous nephrolithotomy outcomes.

Authors:  Wayland J Wu; Zeph Okeke
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2017-05-23       Impact factor: 14.432

5.  Stepwise case selection using Guy's stone score reduces complications during percutaneous nephrolithotomy training.

Authors:  Jiten Jaipuria; Manav Suryavanshi; Amitsinh P Desai; Sanjay Goyal; Kaushal Patel; Sandip S Parhad; Santosh K Subudhi; Chandrashekar V Rao; Satish P Kumar; Tridib K Sen
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2017 Jan-Mar

6.  STONE score versus Guy's Stone Score - prospective comparative evaluation for success rate and complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Authors:  Ujwal Kumar; Vinay Tomar; Sher Singh Yadav; Shivam Priyadarshi; Nachiket Vyas; Neeraj Agarwal; Ram Dayal
Journal:  Urol Ann       Date:  2018 Jan-Mar

7.  Inter-observer variability amongst surgeons and radiologists in assessment of Guy's Stone Score and S.T.O.N.E. nephrolithometry score: A prospective evaluation.

Authors:  Aneesh Srivastava; Priyank Yadav; Kumar Madhavan; Sanjoy K Sureka; Uday P Singh; Rakesh Kapoor; M S Ansari; Hira Lal; Prabhakar Mishra
Journal:  Arab J Urol       Date:  2019-12-18
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.