| Literature DB >> 32257801 |
Arvind P Ganpule1, M Naveen Kumar Reddy1, S B Sudharsan1, Shaishav B Shah2, Ravindra B Sabnis1, Mahesh R Desai1.
Abstract
Staghorn calculi are branched stones which occupy a majority portion of the pelvicaliceal system. An untreated staghorn calculus over time can damage the kidney and deteriorate its function and/or cause life threatening sepsis. Total stone clearance is an important goal in order to eradicate any infective focus, relieve obstruction, prevent recurrence and preserve the kidney function. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is currently the accepted first-line treatment option for staghorn calculi. The options available are single-tract PCNL with an auxiliary procedure like shockwave lithotripsy, single-tract PCNL with flexible nephroscopy, or multitract PCNL. Each has its own pros and cons. But the ultimate goal of treatment for any patient with staghorn calculi should be safety, cost-effectiveness, and to achieve total stone clearance. With this article, we review the management of staghorn calculi with multiple percutaneous ("multitract") access, its advantages and disadvantages and its current position by studying the various published materials across the globe.Entities:
Keywords: Kidney; Multitract; Percutaneous nephrolithotomy; Staghorn; Stone
Year: 2019 PMID: 32257801 PMCID: PMC7096673 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajur.2019.10.001
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Asian J Urol ISSN: 2214-3882
Studies of multiple tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy.
| Studies | No. of renal units | No. of tracts (most commonly) | Stone free rate (%) | Complications (major) (%) | Blood transfusion (%) | Hospital stay, mean (range), day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Singla et al. [ | 149 | 2–6 (3) | 88.9 | 14 | 46 | 6.8 (3–28) |
| Aron et al. [ | 121 | 2–3 (2) | 84 | 4.1 | 14.8 | Not mentioned |
| Zeng et al. [ | 100 | 2–3 | 93 | 4 | 3 | 9.4 (6–13) |
| Liatsikos et al. [ | 100 | 2–6 (2) | 87 | 10 | 45 | 4.6 (3–14) |
| Wong and Leveillee [ | 35 | 2–3 | 95 | 2.8 | 2.2 | 2 (1–10) |
| Hegarty and Desai [ | 20 | 2–6 (3) | 95 | 10 | 20 | 4.25±1.74 |
| Marguet et al. [ | 7 | 2–3 | 71.4 | 0 | 0 | Not mentioned |
| Desai et al. [ | 500 | 2–3 | 84.1 | 5 | 12.4 | 11.1 |
Complications (Clavien-Dindo classification).
| Studies | Clavien Grade I | Clavien Grade II | Clavien Grade III | Clavien Grade IV |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hegarty and Desai [ | Fever 5% | – | – | – |
| Fei et al. [ | Nephrostomy tube displacement 1.89% | Blood transfusion 7.54% | – | – |
| Desai et al. [ | Fever 24.9% | – | Clavien Grade IIIb: Bowel injury 0.35% | – |
| Zhao et al. [ | Fever | Blood transfusion | Angioembolization Group 1: 1.4% | Septic shock |
| Wong and Leveillee [ | Fever 12% | – | – | – |
| Singla et al. [ | Blood transfusion 30.8% | Hydrothorax 4.2% | Clavien Grade IVa: | |
| Annes et al. [ | – | Blood transfusion 8.3% | – | – |
| Martin et al. [ | – | Blood transfusion | – | – |
| Hegarty and Desai [ | – | Blood transfusion 20% | – | – |
| Lee et al. [ | – | – | Clavien Grade IIIb: | – |
| Aron et al. [ | – | – | – | Sepsis 0.97% |
PCNL, percutaneous nephrolithotomy; SIRS, systemic inflammatory response syndrome; –, there were no reported complications in that particular grade of complication.
n=145 pairs; Group 1: Two stage; Group 2: One stage.