Literature DB >> 28544299

Mini PCNL for renal calculi: does size matter?

Derek B Hennessey1, Ned K Kinnear1, Andrew Troy1,2, David Angus1,3, Damien M Bolton1,3, David R Webb1,2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MIP) system for renal calculi. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) procedures with the MIP system were enrolled. Patient position, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, puncture location, stone clearance, postoperative drainage and complications were recorded, and features unique to MIP were noted.
RESULTS: In all, 30 patients underwent 32 mPCNL procedures. The mean stone size was 17 (10.75-21.25) mm and the mean number of stones was 1 (1-2). The median stone clearance rate was 96.5 (95-100)%. The complication rate was 9.3%. No patient required a transfusion. In addition to these outcomes, we noted that the MIP system has many advantages over conventional PCNL (cPCNL). It is easy to learn and can be performed in both supine and prone positions. It is safe for supracostal puncture, provides excellent access to nearly all calyces and upper ureter, has multiple stone treatment options, can be used as an adjunct to cPCNL, and can be performed as a tubeless procedure.
CONCLUSION: Our experience with the MIP system has shown several advantages over cPCNL. mPCNL with the MIP system has several features that suggest it should be considered as an alternative or adjunct to cPCNL, ureteroscopy and extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy.
© 2017 The Authors BJU International © 2017 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  zzm321990MIPzzm321990; zzm321990PCNLzzm321990; mini-PCNL; minimally invasive PCNL; percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28544299     DOI: 10.1111/bju.13839

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  5 in total

1.  Stone clearance times with mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy: Comparison of a 1.5 mm ballistic/ultrasonic mini-probe vs. laser.

Authors:  Brennan Timm; Matthew Farag; Niall F Davis; David Webb; David Angus; Andrew Troy; Damien Bolton; Gregory S Jack
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2021-01       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  Comparison of the Efficacy and Complications of Soft Ureteroscopy Lithotripsy and Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in the Treatment of Urinary Calculi: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  WenLong Han; Jing Ge; Xianlin Xu
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2022-07-01       Impact factor: 2.809

3.  A retrospective analysis on the effect of single-channel minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy combined with retrograde flexible ureteroscopy using the completely lateral decubitus and semi-lithotomy positions to treat complex kidney stones.

Authors:  Dongliang Pan; Lufang Zhang; Jiaxu Pan; Bing Yang; Pengfei Gao; Keping Zhang
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-09

Review 4.  Miniaturised percutaneous nephrolithotomy: Its role in the treatment of urolithiasis and our experience.

Authors:  Guohua Zeng; Wei Zhu; Wayne Lam
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2018-05-14

Review 5.  Present indications and techniques of percutaneous nephrolithotomy: What the future holds?

Authors:  Itay M Sabler; Ioannis Katafigiotis; Ofer N Gofrit; Mordechai Duvdevani
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2018-09-06
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.