INTRODUCTION: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) is the primary treatment modality for management of staghorn stones. PNL in supine position has important advantages over prone positon. However, studies comparing prone and supine positions for PNL in staghorn stone patients have conflicting results, and the aim of the current study was to compare prone and supine positions for PNL in staghorn stone cases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data of patients underwent PNL for staghorn stones in supine or prone position by a single urologist were collected prospectively. The supine and prone position groups were compared for stone free rate (SFR) and complication rates. All patients were evaluated with NCCT for evaluation of SFR. Chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables and Student t test was applied for continuous variables of the treatment groups. RESULTS: The groups were similar for demographic and stone-related characteristics. Multi-caliceal and intercostal access was more common in prone position. Operation duration was significantly shorter and hemoglobin drop was significantly less in supine group. SFR was 64.1 and 60.4% in the supine and prone groups, respectively (p = 0.72). Complication rates were similar in the two groups but Clavien III complications were observed in two patients in the prone group. CONCLUSIONS: PNL in supine position is an effective treatment for management of staghorn stones. The need for multi-caliceal and intercostal puncture is less when combined with retrograde intrarenal surgery. PNL in supine position should be considered as primary treatment option in staghorn stone cases.
INTRODUCTION: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) is the primary treatment modality for management of staghorn stones. PNL in supine position has important advantages over prone positon. However, studies comparing prone and supine positions for PNL in staghorn stone patients have conflicting results, and the aim of the current study was to compare prone and supine positions for PNL in staghorn stone cases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data of patients underwent PNL for staghorn stones in supine or prone position by a single urologist were collected prospectively. The supine and prone position groups were compared for stone free rate (SFR) and complication rates. All patients were evaluated with NCCT for evaluation of SFR. Chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables and Student t test was applied for continuous variables of the treatment groups. RESULTS: The groups were similar for demographic and stone-related characteristics. Multi-caliceal and intercostal access was more common in prone position. Operation duration was significantly shorter and hemoglobin drop was significantly less in supine group. SFR was 64.1 and 60.4% in the supine and prone groups, respectively (p = 0.72). Complication rates were similar in the two groups but Clavien III complications were observed in two patients in the prone group. CONCLUSIONS: PNL in supine position is an effective treatment for management of staghorn stones. The need for multi-caliceal and intercostal puncture is less when combined with retrograde intrarenal surgery. PNL in supine position should be considered as primary treatment option in staghorn stone cases.
Entities:
Keywords:
Complications; Endoscopy combined intrarenal surgery; Percutaneous nephrolithotomy; Staghorn stone; Stone free rate; Supine position
Authors: Gaspar Ibarluzea; Cesare M Scoffone; Cecilia M Cracco; Massimiliano Poggio; Francesco Porpiglia; Carlo Terrone; Ander Astobieta; Isabel Camargo; Mikel Gamarra; Augusto Tempia; Josè G Valdivia Uria; Roberto Mario Scarpa Journal: BJU Int Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Giovanni S Marchini; Fernanda Christina G Berto; Fabio C Vicentini; Chen Jen Shan; Miguel Srougi; Eduardo Mazzucchi Journal: J Endourol Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Khurshid R Ghani; Sero Andonian; Matthew Bultitude; Mihir Desai; Guido Giusti; Zhamshid Okhunov; Glenn M Preminger; Jean de la Rosette Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2016-02-11 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Mahesh Desai; Antonello De Lisa; Burak Turna; Jorge Rioja; Helena Walfridsson; Alessandro D'Addessi; Carson Wong; Jean Rosette On Behalf Of The Croes Pcnl Study Group Journal: J Endourol Date: 2011-07-20 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Gaston Astroza; Michael Lipkin; Andreas Neisius; Glenn Preminger; Marco De Sio; Hiren Sodha; Christian Saussine; Jean de la Rosette Journal: Urology Date: 2013-09-21 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Christian Türk; Aleš Petřík; Kemal Sarica; Christian Seitz; Andreas Skolarikos; Michael Straub; Thomas Knoll Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2015-09-04 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Jae Wook Chung; Heon Ha; Dong Jin Park; Yun Sok Ha; Jun Nyung Lee; So Young Chun; Tae Gyun Kwon; Bum Soo Kim Journal: Investig Clin Urol Date: 2021-03