Journals / JAREM / 2012 / Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 3

Is percutaneous nephrolithotomy safe in patients previously having undergone open nephrolithotomy?

Daha önce açık nefrolitotomi yapılan hastalarda perkütan nefrolitotomi yapılması güvenli midir?

Journal
JAREM
Pages
113–116
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Due to the changes in anatomy, the number of accesses might increase and additional interventions might be required in previously operated patients.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: To investigate whether percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) can be performed safely and effectively in patients who have previously un- dergone open nephrolithotomy.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: A total of 533 PNL procedures were divided into two groups; PCNL’s with (Group-1, n=456) and without previous open nephrolithotomy (Group-2, n=77).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Due to the changes in anatomy, the number of accesses might increase and additional interventions might be required in previously operated patients.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: To investigate whether percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) can be performed safely and effectively in patients who have previously un- dergone open nephrolithotomy. Methods: A total of 533 PNL procedures were divided into two groups; PCNL’s with (Group-1, n=456) and without previous open nephrolithotomy (Group-2, n=77). Both groups were compared for age, body mass index (BMI), stone burden, presence of hydronephrosis, localization of stone, op- eration and fluoroscopy times, number of accesses, complication rate, rate of stone-free status, need for blood transfusion, nephrostomy catheter removal time, and hospital stay. The qui-square, Mann-Whitney U, and Kruskall Wallis tests were used for statistical analyses. A p value of <0.05 was considered as significant. Results: No statistically significant difference was seen between the groups regarding gender, BMI, age, stone volume, presence of hydronephro- sis, localization of stone, rate of stone-free status, need for blood transfusion, operation and fluoroscopy times, complication rates, time to remove nephrostomy catheter, and hospital stay (p>0.05). The number of ports was significantly higher in Group 2 than the group-1 (p=0.01). The presence of hydronephrosis in Group 1 (63.5%) was higher than Group 2 (p=0.022). A history of prior ESWL was found to be higher in Group 1 (35.1%) compared to Group 2 (p=0.03). Conclusion: PNL may be performed effectively and safely in kidney stone patients who have previously undergone open nephrolithotomy. Due to the changes in anatomy, the number of accesses might increase and additional interventions might be required in previously operated patients.

Özet

Amaç: Daha önce açık nefrolitotomi yapılan hastalarda perkütan nefrolitotominin (PNL) güvenli ve etkin bir şekilde yapılabileceğini göstermek. Yöntemler: 2004-2012 yılları arasında yapılan 533 PNL olgusu Grup-1 (456 hasta) daha önce açık nefrolitotomi yapılmayanlar, Grup-2 (77 hasta) daha önce açık nefrolitotomi yapılmış olanlar şeklinde ayrılmıştır. Her iki grup yaş, vücut kitle indeksi (BMI), taş hacmi, operasyon öncesi hidronefroz varlığı, taşın lokalizasyonu, operasyon ve floroskopi süreleri, böbreğe giriş sayısı, komplikasyonlar, kanama miktarları, taştan arınma oranı, kan transfüzyonu gereksinimi, nefrostomi kateterini alma zamanı, hastanede kalış süreleri açısından ki-kare, Mann-Whitney U ve Kruskall Wallis testleri kullanılarak de- ğerlendirilmiş, p 0.05). Girilen port sayısı Grup 2’de daha fazla olup istatiksel olarak anlamlıdır (p=0.01). Operasyon öncesi hidronefroz varlığı Grup 1’deki hastalarda daha yüksek oranda (%63.5) bulunmaktadır (p=0.022). Operasyon öncesi ESWL öyküsü Grup 2 hastalarında daha yüksek oranda saptandı (%35.1), istatiksel olarak anlamlı bulundu (p=0.03). Sonuç: Daha önce açık nefrolitotomi yapılan böbrek taşlı hastalarda PNL etkin ve güvenli bir şekilde yapılabilir, fakat bu hasta grubunda pelvikalisyel sistem ve retroperitoneal anatominin değişebileceği, böbreğe giriş sayısının artabileceği, ek girişimlerin gerekebileceği göz önünde bulundurulmalı- dır.

🔖

Cite This Article

TAŞKIRAN, M., TANRIVERDİ, O., SARIOĞULLARI, U., BAYAR, G., ACINIKLI, H., HORASANLI, K., KENDİRCİ, M., MİROĞLU, C. (2012). Is percutaneous nephrolithotomy safe in patients previously having undergone open nephrolithotomy?. JAREM, Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 3, 113–116. https://ajindex.com/articles/216329

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (1)

  1. Akinci M, Esen T, Tellaloglu S. Urinary stone disease in Turkey: An updated epidemiological study. Eur Urol 1991; 20: 200-3. 2.Goodwin WE, Casey WC, Woolf W. Percutaneous trocar (needle) nephrostomy in hydronephrosis. J Am Med Assoc 1955;157:891-4. [CrossRef] 3.Fernstrom I, Johansson B. Percutaneous pyelolithotomy. A new ext- raction technique. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1976; 10: 257-9. 4.Tiselius HG, Alken P, Buck C, Galluci M, Knoll T, Sarica K, et al. Gui- delines on urolithiasis. European Association of Urology, 2008. 5.Akman T, Binbay M, Akçay M, Tekinarslan E, Kezer C, Ozgor F, et al. Variables influencing operative time during PCNL; an analysis of 1897 cases. Eur Urol 2011; 10: 590. [CrossRef] 6.Hosseini MM, Yousefi AR, Inaloo R, Shakeri S, Tadayyon AR, Amins- harifi AR, et al. Complications of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL): Report of 6749 cases in two referal, training centers, South Iran. Eur Urol 2011; 57: 519-20. 7.Jones DJ, Russell GL, Kellett MJ, Wickham JE. The changing prac- tice of percutaneous stone surgery. Review of 1000 cases1981-1988. Br J Urol 1990; 66: 1-5. [CrossRef] 8.Basiri A, Karrami H, Moghaddam SM, Shadpour P. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with or without a history of open neph- rolithotomy. J Endourol 2003; 17: 213-6. [CrossRef] 9.Tuğcu V, Su FE, Kalfazade N, Şahin S, Özbay B, Taşçı AI. Percutane- ous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in patients with previous open stone surgery. Int Urol Nephrol 2008; 40: 881-4. [CrossRef] 10. Margel D, Lifshitz DA, Kugel V, Dorfmann D, Lask D, Livne PM. Per- cutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients who previously underwent open nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 2005; 19: 1161-4. [CrossRef] 11. Sofikerim M, Demirci D, Gülmez I, Karacagil M. Does previous open nephrolithotomy affect the outcome of percutaneous nephrolitho- tomy? J Endourol 2007; 21: 401-3. [CrossRef] 12. Lojanapiwat B. Previous open nephrolithotomy: does it affect per- cutaneous nephrolithotomy techniques and outcome? J Endourol 2006; 20: 17-20. [CrossRef] 13. Gönen M, Çiçek T, Öztürk B, Özkardeş H. Daha önce geçirilen açık cerrahinin perkütan nefrolitotomi sonuçları üzerine etkileri. Türk Üro- loji Dergisi 2009; 35: 34-7. 14. Binbay M, Akman T, Kezer C, Özgör F, Erbin A, Özkuvancı U, et al. Effect of pelvicalicieal system anatomy on success rate in percutane- ous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 2010; 9: 605. [CrossRef]