Literature DB >> 26645871

Management of anterior caliceal stones >15 mm.

M El-Shazly1, M Aziz2, M Omar2, O Al-Hunaidi3, A R El-Nahas4.   

Abstract

Anterior caliceal stones represent a challenge to endourologist to select the best modality of management with the least morbidity. To study different treatment modalities of management of anterior caliceal stones >15 mm. It is an observational prospective study of patients with anterior caliceal stones more than 15 mm. Inclusion criteria were patients with isolated anterior caliceal stones, or branched anterior caliceal stones with posterior caliceal extension. Patients were evaluated using non-contrast CT preoperatively. They were divided into three groups: group 1 underwent PCNL through posterior caliceal puncture in cases with wide anterior calyx infundibulum or obtuse infundibulopelvic pelvic, group 2 underwent PCNL through anterior caliceal access in cases with narrow infundibulum or acute infundibulopelvic angel and group 3 underwent flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy. Intraoperative and postoperative findings were recorded and compared. Eighty eight patients were included in this study, Group 1 (44 patients) group 2 (28 patients), and group 3 (16 patients). Operative time was not significantly different across the three groups (68 ± 11.5, 72 ± 9 and 74 ± 11 min in group 1, 2 and 3, respectively, P = 0.053). Fluoroscopy time was significantly shorter for group 3 (2 ± 0.5 m, P = 0.0001) compared to group 1 and 2 (5.6 ± 4.6 and 4.5 ± 1.4 min), respectively. There were no significant differences in stone-free rates after initial treatment between the three groups; 84, 82, and 69 %, in groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively (P = 0.4). Postoperative hemoglobin drop was noted to be highest for group 2 and lowest for group 3 which was significantly different (1.7 ± 0.8, 2.2 ± 1.1, and 0.3 ± 0.3 g/dl, for patients in groups 1, 2 and 3 respectively, P = 0.0001). Group 2 showed the highest post-operative complication rate (21 %) in comparison to group 1 (11 %) and group 3 (6 %), however, differences were not statistically significant (P = 0.3). PCNL through posterior or anterior caliceal puncture is an excellent modality to treat anterior caliceal stones with high stone clearance rate. Despite the higher chance of bleeding with anterior caliceal puncture, it is still inevitably needed in difficult anterior caliceal stones with unfavorable anatomy. RIRS is a good alternative to PCNL with the advantage of less radiation exposure and less bleeding.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anterior; Pcnl; Renal; Stones

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26645871     DOI: 10.1007/s00240-015-0851-8

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


  12 in total

1.  Percutaneous pyelolithotomy. A new extraction technique.

Authors:  I Fernström; B Johansson
Journal:  Scand J Urol Nephrol       Date:  1976

Review 2.  Advances in percutaneous nephrostolithotomy.

Authors:  Leslie A Deane; Ralph V Clayman
Journal:  Urol Clin North Am       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 2.241

3.  Management of lower pole renal calculi: shock wave lithotripsy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus flexible ureteroscopy.

Authors:  Glenn M Preminger
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2006-02-07

Review 4.  Percutaneous nephrolithotomy made easier: a practical guide, tips and tricks.

Authors:  Raymond Ko; Frédéric Soucy; John D Denstedt; Hassan Razvi
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2007-10-08       Impact factor: 5.588

5.  Does pelvicaliceal system anatomy affect success of percutaneous nephrolithotomy?

Authors:  Murat Binbay; Tolga Akman; Faruk Ozgor; Ozgur Yazici; Erhan Sari; Akif Erbin; Cem Kezer; Omer Sarilar; Yalcın Berberoglu; Ahmet Yaser Muslumanoglu
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2011-06-15       Impact factor: 2.649

6.  Reduced radiation exposure with the use of an air retrograde pyelogram during fluoroscopic access for percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Authors:  Michael E Lipkin; John G Mancini; Dorit E Zilberman; Maria E Raymundo; Daniel Yong; Michael N Ferrandino; Michael J Miller; Terry T Yoshizumi; Glenn M Preminger
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2011-03-22       Impact factor: 2.942

7.  The impact of pelvicaliceal anatomy on the success of retrograde intrarenal surgery in patients with lower pole renal stones.

Authors:  Berkan Resorlu; Ural Oguz; Eylem Burcu Resorlu; Derya Oztuna; Ali Unsal
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  The impact of pelvicalyceal anatomy in treatment with shock wave lithotripsy and flexible ureterorenoscopy of lower pole renal stones.

Authors:  Senol Adanur; Tevfik Ziypak
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2014-05-20       Impact factor: 3.436

9.  The lobar structure of the kidney.

Authors:  J Hodson
Journal:  Br J Urol       Date:  1972-04

10.  Retrograde intrarenal surgery versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the management of lower-pole renal stones with a diameter of 15 to 20 mm.

Authors:  Omer F Bozkurt; Berkan Resorlu; Yildiray Yildiz; Ceren E Can; Ali Unsal
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2011-06-09       Impact factor: 2.942

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.