Literature DB >> 29450731

Is mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy a safe alternative to extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy in pediatric age group in borderline stones? a randomized prospective study.

Ahmed Farouk1, Ahmed Tawfick2, Mohamed Shoeb1, Mahmoud A Mahmoud1, Diaa Eldin Mostafa1, Mohamed Hasan1, Hany M Abdalla1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) remains the most common first line of treatment for renal stones in the pediatric population. The purpose of this study is to evaluate and compare the outcomes of the ESWL and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 108 patients younger than 12 years of age with 1-2 cm single renal stone (pelvic or calyceal) were randomized into two groups, each containing 54 patients. Patients in group A were subjected to mini-PCNL using 16.5 Fr percutaneous sheath while those in group B underwent ESWL using Dornier Compact Sigma.
RESULTS: The stone-free rate (SFR) after first session was 88.9% (48 cases) and 55.6% (30 cases) for groups A and B, respectively. The difference is highly statistically significant P = 0.006. Two patients (3.7%) in group A needed 2nd session of PCNL, while 18 patients (33.3%)in group B needed a 2nd session, of theses 18 patients six patients needed a 3rd session of ESWL. After the third session of ESWL and second look PCNL the stone-free rates were 92.59% (50 cases) and 88.89% (48 cases) for groups A and B, respectively, (P = 0.639), which is statistically insignificant. The mean hospital stay and fluoroscopy exposure were significantly longer in the mini-PCNL group. The complication rate in groups A and group B were (22.2%) and (14.8%), respectively, which is statistically insignificant (P = 0.484).
CONCLUSIONS: According to Clavien grade of complications mini-PCNL is a safe procedure, and after three session of ESWL, mini-PCNL has a similar stone-free rate with a lower retreatment rate. However, the mini-PCNL has more radiation exposure, and requires a longer hospital stay.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ESWL; Endourology; Extracorporeal shock wave lithotrips; Mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy; Pediatric renal stone

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29450731     DOI: 10.1007/s00345-018-2231-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Urol        ISSN: 0724-4983            Impact factor:   4.226


  28 in total

Review 1.  Prevention and treatment of complications following percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Authors:  Andreas Skolarikos; Jean de la Rosette
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 2.309

2.  Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the treatment of pediatric urolithiasis: a single institution experience.

Authors:  Konstantinos N Stamatiou; Ioannis Heretis; Dimitrios Takos; Vaios Papadimitriou; Frank Sofras
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2010 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.541

3.  Safety and efficacy of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in infants, preschool age, and older children with different sizes of instruments.

Authors:  Ali Unsal; Berkan Resorlu; Cengiz Kara; Omer Faruk Bozkurt; Ekrem Ozyuvali
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 2.649

4.  Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children with moderate-size kidney stones: results of multi-institutional analysis.

Authors:  Berkan Resorlu; Ali Unsal; Abdulkadir Tepeler; Gokhan Atis; Zafer Tokatli; Derya Oztuna; Abdullah Armagan; Cenk Gurbuz; Turhan Caskurlu; Remzi Saglam
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2012-06-05       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  A Comparison of 2 Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Techniques for the Treatment of Pediatric Kidney Stones of Sizes 10-20 mm: Microperc vs Miniperc.

Authors:  Tuna Karatag; Abdulkadir Tepeler; Mesrur Selcuk Silay; Mehmet Nuri Bodakci; Ibrahim Buldu; Mansur Daggulli; Namik Kemal Hatipoglu; Mustafa Okan Istanbulluoglu; Abdullah Armagan
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 2.649

6.  Comparison of shockwave lithotripsy and microperc for treatment of kidney stones in children.

Authors:  Namık Kemal Hatipoglu; Ahmet Ali Sancaktutar; Abdulkadir Tepeler; Mehmet Nuri Bodakci; Necmettin Penbegul; Murat Atar; Yasar Bozkurt; Haluk Söylemez; Mesrur Selcuk Silay; Mustafa Okan Istanbulluoğlu; Tolga Akman; Abdullah Armagan
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2013-08-09       Impact factor: 2.942

7.  MINI PCNL in a pediatric population.

Authors:  Tze M Wah; Lizi Kidger; Steven Kennish; Henry Irving; Azad Najmaldin
Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol       Date:  2012-08-24       Impact factor: 2.740

8.  Does percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children cause significant renal scarring?

Authors:  Lubna Samad; Samia Qureshi; Zafar Zaidi
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2006-04-05       Impact factor: 1.830

9.  Slow vs rapid delivery rate shock wave lithotripsy for pediatric renal urolithiasis: a prospective randomized study.

Authors:  Hosni Khairy Salem; Hesham Fathy; Hanny Elfayoumy; Hussein Aly; Ahmed Ghonium; Mostafa A Mohsen; Abd El Rahim Hegazy
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2013-11-18       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Comparison of children versus adults undergoing mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy: large-scale analysis of a single institution.

Authors:  Guohua Zeng; Zhijian Zhao; ShawPong Wan; Wen Zhong; Wenqi Wu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-06-24       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  [Current aspects in pediatric urolithiasis treatment].

Authors:  W L Strohmaier
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  Effectiveness and complications of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children: one center experience with 232 kidney units.

Authors:  Numan Baydilli; Halil Tosun; Emre Can Akınsal; Abdullah Gölbaşı; Sibel Yel; Deniz Demirci
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2019-11-14
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.