Literature DB >> 28478480

What is the fate of insignificant residual fragment following percutaneous nephrolithotomy in pediatric patients with anomalous kidney? A comparison with normal kidney.

Bimalesh Purkait1, Rahul Janak Sinha2, Ankur Bansal2, Ashok Kumar Sokhal2, Kawaljit Singh2, Vishwajeet Singh2.   

Abstract

Pediatric population has increasing incidence of renal calculus and it is estimated to be around 50/10,000 population. The treatment of choice for large and complex stone in anomalous kidney is percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). The fate of insignificant residual fragment after PCNL in pediatric patients is not well documented. Here, we are reporting our long-term experience and follow-up of insignificant residual fragment in pediatric patients with anomalous kidney in comparison to normal kidney. Intuitional ethical approval was taken. A retrospective analysis of PCNL in pediatric (<18 years) anomalous kidney was performed from 2001 to 2013. The data of 52 pediatric patients with anomalous kidney (group B) have been compared to 251 normal kidneys (group A). The mean age of the patients was 7.83 + 3.45 (range 3-18) in group A and 8.21 ± 3.25 (range 5-18) in group B. The mean size of the insignificant residual fragment was 2.2 + 0.5 mm (1-4) in group A and 2.1 + 0.6 mm (range 1-4) in group B. Most of these residual fragments were single in number (72.55 vs. 67.30%, respectively). 54.98% children in group A and 67.30% in group B were symptomatic in the follow-up. Stone size was increased, stable and spontaneously passed in 49.8 vs. 71.15, 22.7 vs. 19.23 and 27.49 vs. 9.61% (p < 0.03), respectively, over mean follow-up of 50.34 months. Insignificant residual fragments in children are notorious for regrowth (49.8% in normal and 71.15% in anomalous kidney) in future. Most of the children will require symptomatic treatment (55.37 vs. 82.69%) or reintervention (39 vs. 46%) for insignificant residual fragment.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Insignificant residual fragments; Pediatric patients; Percutaneous nephrolithotomy; Stone regrowth

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28478480     DOI: 10.1007/s00240-017-0980-3

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


  24 in total

1.  Effectiveness of ultrasonography in the postoperative follow-up of pediatric patients undergoing ureteroscopic stone manipulation.

Authors:  Berkan Resorlu; Cengiz Kara; Eylem Burcu Resorlu; Ali Unsal
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2011-09-28       Impact factor: 1.827

Review 2.  Management of upper urinary tract calculi with extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy.

Authors:  D M Newman; J E Lingeman
Journal:  Compr Ther       Date:  1989-08

3.  High recurrence rate at 5-year followup in children after upper urinary tract stone surgery.

Authors:  Michael Lao; Barry A Kogan; Mark D White; Paul J Feustel
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2013-09-16       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Comparison of endoscopic and radiological residual fragment rate following percutaneous nephrolithotripsy.

Authors:  J D Denstedt; R V Clayman; D D Picus
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  Effect of medical management and residual fragments on recurrent stone formation following shock wave lithotripsy.

Authors:  J K Fine; C Y Pak; G M Preminger
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Pediatric urinary stone disease--does age matter?

Authors:  Carmin M Kalorin; Andrew Zabinski; Ikenna Okpareke; Mark White; Barry A Kogan
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2009-03-17       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Are small residual stone fragments really insignificant in children?

Authors:  Nida Dincel; Berkan Resorlu; Ali Unsal; Abdulkadir Tepeler; Mesrur Selcuk Silay; Abdullah Armağan; Akif Diri; Ahmet Ali Sancaktutar; Tevfik Ziypak; Sevgi Mir
Journal:  J Pediatr Surg       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.545

8.  [Which is the best performing imaging method for demonstrating residual renal calculi?].

Authors:  O Gaucher; L Cormier; M Deneuville; D Régent; P Mangin; J Hubert
Journal:  Prog Urol       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 0.915

9.  Outcome of small residual stone fragments following shock wave lithotripsy in children.

Authors:  Kourosh Afshar; Gordon McLorie; Frank Papanikolaou; Rowja Malek; Elizabeth Harvey; Joao L Pippi-Salle; Darius J Bagli; Antoine E Khoury; Walid Farhat
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Outcomes of retrograde flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy for stone disease in patients with anomalous kidneys.

Authors:  İbrahim Mesut Ugurlu; Tolga Akman; Murat Binbay; Erdem Tekinarslan; Özgür Yazıcı; Mehmet Fatih Akbulut; Faruk Özgör; Ahmet Yaser Müslümanoğlu
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2014-08-27       Impact factor: 3.436

View more
  2 in total

1.  Laparoscopic Surgery in Pediatric Upper Tract Urolithiasis: An Alternate Modality.

Authors:  Chhabi Ranu Gupta; Niyaz Ahmed Khan; Mamta Sengar; Anup Mohta
Journal:  J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg       Date:  2021-11-12

2.  Safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided low-pressure perfusion mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children aged 1-7 years: a retrospective observational study.

Authors:  Zhi Qiu; Quan-Bin Guo; Zakir Ablikim; Xu-Wen Shi; Jiang-Jiang Hou; Chang Chen; Mamat Hasanjan; Mamat Akbarjan; Abdukadir Anwar
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2021-07-03       Impact factor: 2.370

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.