Journals / Van Tıp Dergisi / 2014 / Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 3

Our experience with single input single session with percutaneous nephrolithotomy applied in our clinic

Kliniğimizde uygulanan tek seans-Tek giriş perkütan nefrolitotomi deneyimimiz

Pages
133–138
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)

Conclusion: PCNL method with acceptable complication rates can be applied effectively and safely in the treatment of kidney stones.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: To evaluate the efficacy and morbidity in a total of 57 percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) patients.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Methods: Between January 2010 and May 2013 the records of 57 patients in whom PCNL was performed due to kidney stones were retrospectively evaluated.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: PCNL method with acceptable complication rates can be applied effectively and safely in the treatment of kidney stones.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2010 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate the efficacy and morbidity in a total of 57 percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) patients. Material and Methods: Between January 2010 and May 2013 the records of 57 patients in whom PCNL was performed due to kidney stones were retrospectively evaluated. All patients were evaluated with intravenous urography (IVU) and / or abdominopelvic tomography (CT). Patient-related factors such as patient age, sex, party, ipsilateral open surgery, PCNL, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), as well as the story of stone size, stone location, degree of hydronephrosis, the location and number of access, operation and fluoroscopy times, intraoperative and postoperative complications, blood transfusion requirement, the success rate was evaluated in terms of length of hospital stay, and secondary treatment requirements. Results: Of the 57 PCNL applications, 29 (51%) were women and 28 (49%)were men, 28% right sided, 54% left sided, 17% bilateral, the average volume of stone 3196.64 mm3, and mean age 54.9 years (21-84), respectively. Pre-operative story revealed open surgery in 4 (7%) patients, ESWL in 10 patients (17%), PCNL in 5 (8%) patients. There was no hydronephrosis in 20 (35.1%) patients before the operation, while 37 (64.9%) patients were found to have hydronephrosis. Balloon dilator was used in all of the 57 patients. 3 patients (5%) had horseshoe kidney, and one patient (1.7%) had malrotion. No perioperative complications occurred in 53 patients (92.9%). Perioperative complications were observed in 4 patients (7.1%). Blood transfusion was required in 3 patients (5%). The mean operation time was 95 minutes and fluoroscopy time was 5.1 min. Conclusion: PCNL method with acceptable complication rates can be applied effectively and safely in the treatment of kidney stones.

Özet

Amaç: Perkütan nefrolitotomi (PCNL) cerrahisi yapılan toplam 57 hastada tedavinin etkinliğini ve morbiditesini değerlendirmektir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Ocak 2010-Mayıs 2013 tarihleri arasında böbrek taşı nedeniyle PCNL yapılan 57 hastanın kayıtları geriye dönük olarak incelendi. Olguların tamamına çalışma ile ilgili bilgi verildi ve etik kurul onayı alındı. Hastaların tamamı intravenöz piyelografi (İVP) ve/veya abdominopelvik tomografi (BT) ile değerlendirildi. Hastalar yaş, cinsiyet, taraf, aynı taraf açık cerrahi, PCNL, ekstrakorporal shock wave litotripsi (ESWL) gibi hastayla ilişkili faktörler ile birlikte taş boyutu, taşın lokalizasyonu, hidronefroz derecesi, akses lokalizasyonu ve sayısı, operasyon ve floroskopi süreleri, intraoperatif ve postoperatif komplikasyonlar, kan transfüzyonu gereksinimi, başarı oranı, hastanede kalış süreleri ve ikincil tedavi gereksinimleri açısından değerlendirildi. Bulgular: 57 PCNL uygulamasının 29’u bayan (%51), 28’i erkek (%49), %28’i sağ, %54’ü sol taraf, %17’ si bilateral, ortalama taş hacmi 3196.64 mm3, ortalama yaş 54,9 (21-84) olarak tespit edildi. Operasyon öncesi öyküde 4 hasta da açık cerrahi (%7), 10 hasta da ESWL (%17), 5 hasta da ise PCNL (%8) uygulanmış. Operasyon öncesi 20 hastada hiç hidronefroz olmadığı (%35.1), 37 hastada (%64.9) hidronefroz olduğu tespit edildi. 57 hastanın tamamına balon dilatatör kullanıldı. 3 hasta atnalı böbrek (%5), bir hasta malrote (%1.7) idi. 53 hastada perioperatif komplikasyon görülmedi (%92.9). 4 hastada perioperatif komplikasyon görüldü (%7.1). 3 hastada kan transfüzyonuna ihtiyaç duyuldu (%5). Ortalama operasyon ve floroskopi süreleri sırayla 95 dk., 5.1 dk. tespit edildi. Sonuç: PCNL yöntemi böbrek taşlarının tedavisinde kabul edilebilir komplikasyon oranlarıyla etkili ve güvenli bir şekilde uygulanabilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖĞREDEN, E., BENLİ, E. (2014). Our experience with single input single session with percutaneous nephrolithotomy applied in our clinic. Van Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 3, 133–138. https://ajindex.com/articles/334107

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Stoller ML. Urinary stone disease; in Tanagho EA McAninch JW 17th edition Smith’s general urology, McGraw Hill Medical 2008
  2. Akinci M, Esen T, Tellaloglu S Urinary stone disease in Turkey: An updated epidemiological study. Eur Urol 1991; 20(3):200-203
  3. Fernström I, Johansson B. Percutaneous pyelolithotomy. A new extraction technique. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1976; 10(3):257-259
  4. Smith AD, Lange PH, Fraley EE. Applications of percutaneous nephrostomy. New challenges and opportunities in endourology. J Urol 1979; 121(3):382
  5. Goodwin WE, Casey WC, Woolf W. Percutaneous trocar (needle) nephrostomy in hydronephrosis. J Am Med Assoc 1955; 157(11):891-894
  6. Tiselius HG, Alken P, Buck C, Galluci M, Knoll T, Sarica K, et al. Guidelines on urolithiasis, European Association of Urology 2008
  7. Paik ML, Wainstein MA, Spirnak P, Hampel N, Resnick MI. Current indications for open stone surgery in the treatment of renal and ureteral calculi. J Urol 1998; 159(2):374-378
  8. Snyder JA, Smith AD. Staghorn calculi: percutaneous extraction versus anatrophic nephrolithotomy. J Urol 1986; 136(2):351-354
  9. Kim SC, Kuo RL, Tinmouth WW, Watkins S, Lingeman JE. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for caliceal diverticular calculi: a novel single stage approach. J Urol 2005; 173(4):1194-1198
  10. Pearle MS, Clayman RV. Outcomes and selection of surgical therapies of stones in the kidney and ureter. In: Coe FL, Favus MJ, Pak CYC, Parks JH, Preminger GM (Eds). Kidney Stones: Medical and surgical management. Philadelphia; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 1995; 709-755
  11. Deane LA, Clayman RV. Advances in percutaneous nephrostolithotomy Urol Clin North Am 2007; 34(3):383-395
  12. Khaitan A, Gupta NP, Hemal AK, Dogra PN, Seth A, Aron M. Post-ESWL, clinically insignificant residual stones: reality or myth? Urology 2002; 59(1):20-24
  13. Skolarikos A, Alivizatos G, de la Rosette JJ: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy and its legacy. Eur Urol 2005; 47(1):22-28
  14. Binbay M, Akman T, Kezer C, Özgör F, Erbin A, Özkuvancı U, et al. Effect of pelvicalicieal system anatomy on success rate in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 2010; 9(6):605. 15. de la Rosette JJ, Alivizatos G, Madersbacher S. Ürolitiazis kılavuzları, EAU Kılavuzları 2007;54
  15. Segura JW, Preminger GM, Assimos DG, Dretler SP, Kahn RI, Lingeman JE, et al. Nephrolithiazis clinical guidelines panel summary report on the management of staghorn calculi. J Urol 1994; 151(6):1648-1651
  16. Jones DJ, Wickham JE, Kellett MJ. Per