Journals / Türk Üroloji Dergisi/Turkish Journal of Urology / 2002 / Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 2

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in kidney stones

Böbrek taşlarının tedavisinde perkütan nefrolitotomi

Pages
194–200
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)

The overall stone free rate was 68% for the whole group, whereas it was significantly lower in Group II than in Group I (60% vs. 97%, p=0.018).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study we attempted to evaluate the association of stone burden on the effectiveness and complications of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) for kidney stones.
📊
Key Findings & Data:One hundred twenty eight patients with kidney stone in whom PNL was performed between 1987- 2000 with a mean age of 42 years (range of 16-77 years) were included.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The overall stone free rate was 68% for the whole group, whereas it was significantly lower in Group II than in Group I (60% vs. 97%, p=0.018).
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2000 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Böbrek taşı · Ürolojik cerrahi prosedürler · Zaman

Abstract

In this study we attempted to evaluate the association of stone burden on the effectiveness and complications of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) for kidney stones. One hundred twenty eight patients with kidney stone in whom PNL was performed between 1987- 2000 with a mean age of 42 years (range of 16-77 years) were included. Of these 128 subjects 5 had bilateral and 3 had unilateral recurrent stones. A total of 151 PNL procedures were performed to treat 136 renal units (RU). The patients were stratified according to stone burden as Group I (stones$\\leq$2 cm) and Group II (stones>2 cm) in order to evaluate the effect of stone burden on the procedures of PNL. The mean duration of the operation and hospital stay after procedure was 85.5 minutes (range of 30-300 minutes) and 6.7 days (range of 3-31 days), respectively. The hospital stay of patients in Group II was longer than those in Group I (p=0.006). The overall stone free rate was 68% for the whole group, whereas it was significantly lower in Group II than in Group I (60% vs. 97%, p=0.018). Various complications were encountered in 59 (46%) of the patients during and after procedure and 8 (6%) of those 59 subjects underwent surgical procedures due to these complications. On the other hand patients in Group II experienced more complications than those in Group I (p=0.025).

Özet

Perkütan nefrolitotomi (PNL) uyguladığımız hastalarda taş boyutunun yöntemin etkinliğine ve komplikasyon oranlarına etkisini değerlendirdik. Ocak 1987 ve Kasım 2000 yılları arasında ortalama yaşı 42 yıl (16-77) olan 128 hastaya PNL uygulandı. 5\'i bilateral, 3\'ü rekürren taşlar nedeniyle olmak üzere 136 renal üniteye (RÜ) 151 girişim yapıldı. PNL\'nin taş boyutuna göre etkinliğini değerlendirmek için olgular Grup I ($\\leq$2 cm2) ve Grup II (>2 cm2) olmak üzere 2 gruba ayrıldı. Ortalama operasyon süresi 85.5 (30-300) dakika ve hastaların ortalama ameliyat sonrası yatış süresi 6.7 (3-31) gün olarak bulundu. Operasyon sonrası yatış sürelerinin Grup II\'de anlamlı olarak daha uzun olduğu görüldü (p=0.006). Tüm grup için taştan arınma oranı %68 olarak belirlenirken bu oran Grup Il\'de Grup I\'e göre anlamlı olarak daha düşük bulundu (%60 ve %97; p=0.018). İşlem sırasında veya sonrasında toplam 59 (%46) hastada çeşitli komplikasyonlar gelişti. Sekiz hastaya (%6) gelişen komplikasyonları nedeniyle açık veya endoürolojik girişim yapıldı. Komplikasyonlar taş boyutuna göre değerlendirildiğinde, Grup Il\'de anlamlı olarak daha yüksek bulunduğu gözlendi (p=0.025).

🔖

Cite This Article

YALÇIN, V., ÖNDER, A. U., DEMİRKESEN, O., ÖNAL, B., KALKAN, M., KURAL, A. R. (2002). Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in kidney stones. Türk Üroloji Dergisi/Turkish Journal of Urology, Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 2, 194–200. https://ajindex.com/articles/328837

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Fernström I and Johannson B: Percutaneous pyelithotomy. A new extraction technique. Scand J Urol Nephrol, 10: 257, 1976
  2. Smith AD, Reinke DB, Miller RP and Lange PH: Percutaneous nephrostomy in the manage-ment of ureteral and renal calculi. Radiology, 133: 49, 1979
  3. Chaussy C, Schmeidt E, Jochman D, et al: First clinical experience with extracorporeally in-duced destruction of kidney stones by shock wa-ves. J Urol, 131:417, 1982
  4. Lingeman JE, Coury TA, Newman DM, Kah-noski RJ, Mertz JHO, Mosbaugh PG, Steele RE, Woods JR: Comparison of results and mor-bidity of percutaneous nephrostolithotomy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol, 138: 485, 1987
  5. Ramakumar S, Segura JW: Renal calculi: Per-cutaneous management. Urol Clin North Am, 27 (4): 618, 2000
  6. Segura JW, Preminger GM, Assimos DG, Dretler SP, Kahn RI, Lingeman JE, Macaluso JJ and McCullough DL: Nephrolithiasis Clini-cal Guidelines Panel summary report on the ma-nagement of Koraliform calculi. The American Urological Association Nephrolithiasis Clinical Guidelines Panel. J. Urol., 151: 1648, 1994
  7. Hollowell OMP, Patel RV, Bales GT, Gerber GS: Internet and postal survey endourologic practice patterns among American urologists. J. Urol., 163: 1779, 2000
  8. Lingeman JE, Siegel YI, Steele B: Management of lower-pole nephrolithiasis: A critical analysis. J Urol, 151: 663, 1994
  9. Wolf JS, Clayman RV: Percutaneous nephrosto-lithotomy: What is its role in 1997? Urol Clin North Am, 24: 43, 1997
  10. Sampaio FJB, Aragao AHM: Inferior pole col-lecting system anatomy: Its probable role in ext-racorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol, 147: 322, 1992
  11. Elbahnasy AM, Shalhav AL, Hoenig DM, Elashry OM, Smith DS, Mcdougall EM, Clay-man RV: Lower caliceal stone clearance after shock wave lithotripsy or ureteroscopy: The im-pact of lower pole radiographic anatomy. J Urol, 159: 676, 1998
  12. Clayman RV, Mcdougall EM and Nakada SY: Endourology of the upper urinary tract: Percuta-neous renal and ureteral procedures. In: Camp-bell's Urology. Edited by Walsh PC, Retik AB, Vaughan EJ and Wein AJ Philadelphia: WB Sa-unders Company, vol. 3, Chapt. 94: 2789-2874, 1998
  13. Synder JA, Smith AD: Koraliform calculi: Per-cutaneous extraction versus anatrophic nephrolit-hotomy. J. Urol., 136: 351, 1986
  14. Şahin A, Erdem E, Öner S, Hasçiçek M, Bilen CY, Tekin A, Kendi S: Perkütan nefrolitotomi:İlk 76 renal ünitedeki erken sonuçlarımız. Üroloji Bülteni, 10 (2): 73, 1999
  15. Badawy H, Salama A,