SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Yeni Üroloji Dergisi / 2015 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 2

Our experience of the first 70 percutaneous nephrolithotomy at Bitlis State Hospital; a retrospective analysis

Bitlis Devlet Hastanesi'nde yapılan ilk 70 perkütan nefrolitotomi deneyimimiz; retrospektif bir analiz

MUHAMMET ŞAHİN BAĞBANCI
ONUR DEDE
Devrim KAYAN
Tezcan SEZGİN
Yasin AYDOĞMUŞ
Pages
8–13
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)

In this study stone free rate was 80% and overall success rate was 84,3%. 14 (20%) patients had residual stone fragments and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) was performed for 9 patients after PCNL. 7 (10%) patients received blood transfusion, mean double J (DJ) catheter insertion rate was 11,4%.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: In this study, we analysed the first 70 percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) cases’ records retrospectively that have been performed at Bitlis State Hospital.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Methods: Between March 2011 and October 2013, 70 PCNL operations were performed at Bitlis State Hospital.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this study stone free rate was 80% and overall success rate was 84,3%. 14 (20%) patients had residual stone fragments and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) was performed for 9 patients after PCNL. 7 (10%) patients received blood transfusion, mean double J (DJ) catheter insertion rate was 11,4%.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2011 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objectives: In this study, we analysed the first 70 percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) cases’ records retrospectively that have been performed at Bitlis State Hospital. Material and Methods: Between March 2011 and October 2013, 70 PCNL operations were performed at Bitlis State Hospital. Patient records were analysed. The relationship between stone burden and surgical time, stone burden and surgical success, stone burden and stone free rates were analysed. The changing of elapsed time between inserting endotracheal tube and puncturing the access needle in time was estimated. Results: The mean patient age was 39,6±13,6. Mean operation time was 120±16,37 min. In this study stone free rate was 80% and overall success rate was 84,3%. 14 (20%) patients had residual stone fragments and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) was performed for 9 patients after PCNL. 7 (10%) patients received blood transfusion, mean double J (DJ) catheter insertion rate was 11,4%. Conclusion: In the surgical treatment of large renal stones (2 cm<), PCNL is recommended for the first treatment choice. When appropriate conditions are prepared, PCNL surgery can be performed for renal stones in peripheral hospitals.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, Bitlis Devlet Hastanesinde böbrek taşı nedeniyle perkütan nefrolitotomi (PCNL) yapılan ilk 70 vakayla ilgili deneyimimizi paylaşmak amaçlanmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Bu çalışmaya, Mart 2011 ve Ocak 2013 tarihleri arasında Bitlis Devlet Hastanesi’nde böbrek taşı nedeniyle PCNL yapılan 70 hasta alındı. Hastaların verileri retrospektif olarak değerlendirildi. Cerrahi süresi ile taş boyutları arasındaki ilişki, taş yükü ile taşsızlık oranları ve başarı oranları arasındaki ilişki analiz edildi. Endotrakeal tüp takılmasından akses iğnesi ponksiyonuna kadar olan sürenin zaman içerisindeki değişimine bakılarak yardımcı sağlık personelinin öğrenim eğrisi değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Hastaların ortalama yaşları 39,6±13,6 idi. Ortalama operasyon süresi 120±16,37 dk idi. Cerrahi sonrası taşsızlık oranı %80, başarı oranı %84,3 idi. Ondört (%20) hastada rezidü taş kaldı, yedi hastaya kan transfüzyonu yapıldı(% 10). Dokuz hastaya cerrahi sonrası taş kırma (ESWL) yapıldı. Ortalama nefrostomili kalma süresi iki gün, postop double J (DJ) kateter takılma oranı ise %11,4’tü. Sonuç: Günümüzde 2 cm’den büyük böbrek taşlarında PCNL ilk tercih edilen cerrahi seçenektir. Uygun koşullar sağlandığında ikinci basamak hastanelerde seçilmiş vakalarda gü- venle yapılabilecek bir cerrahi tekniktir

🔖

Cite This Article

BAĞBANCI, M. Ş., DEDE, O., KAYAN, D., SEZGİN, T., AYDOĞMUŞ, Y. (2015). Our experience of the first 70 percutaneous nephrolithotomy at Bitlis State Hospital; a retrospective analysis. Yeni Üroloji Dergisi, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 2, 8–13. https://ajindex.com/articles/337405

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Fernstrom I and Johansson B. Percutaneous pyelolithotomy. A new extraction technique. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1976; 10: 257-9
  2. Ramakumar S, Segura JW. Renal Calculi. Percutaneous management. Urol Clin North Am 2000; 27:618
  3. Tiselius HG, Ackermann D, Alken P et al. EAU Guidelines on Urolithiasis. Eur Urol 2001; 40: 362-71
  4. Lingeman JE, Lifshitz DA, Evan AP. Surgical management of urinary lithiasis. In: Walsh PC, Retick AB, Vahghan ED et al. editors. Campbell’s Urology. 8th edition. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 2002. p.3362-3
  5. Bloom DA, Morgan RJ, Scardino PL. Thomas Hillier and percutaneous nephrostomy. Urology 1989; 33: 346-50
  6. Muslumanoglu AY, Binbay M, Yuruk E et al. Updated epidemiologic study of urolithiasis in Turkey. I: Changing characteristics of urolithiasis. Urol Res 2011; 39: 309-14
  7. Yalçın V, Önal B, Çitgez S et al. Üst Kaliks Girişi Yapılan Perkütan Nefrolitotomi Olgularında İstenmeyen Yan Etki Oranları ve Sonuçlar. Türk Üroloji Dergisi 2007; 33: 191- 195
  8. Wignall GR, Canales BK, Denstedt JD et al. Minimally Invasive Approaches to Upper Urinary Tract Urolithiasis. Urol Clin N Am 2008; 35: 441-454
  9. Gupta R, Kumar A, Kapoor R et al. Prospective evaluation of safety and efficacy of the supracostal approach for percutaneous nephrolithotomy BJU INT. 2003; 90: 809-13
  10. Tefekli A, Esen T, Olbert PJ et al. Isolated upper pole access in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a large-scale analysis from the CROES percutaneous nephrolithotomy global study. J Urol 2013; 189: 568-73
  11. Leslie A.Deane, Ralph V. Clayman. Advances in Percutaneous Nephrostolithotomy. Urol Clin North Am 2007; 34: 383-95
  12. Karakan T, Diri A, Hascicek AM et al. Comparison of ultrasonic and pneumatic intracorporeal lithotripsy techniques during percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Scientific WorldJournal 2013: 604361
  13. Kuo RL, Paterson RF, Siqueira TM Jr et al. In vitro assessment of lithoclast ultra intracorporeal lithotripter. J Endourol 2004; 18: 153-6
  14. Ağraş K, Üçgül Y, Aldemir M et al. Böbrek Taşlarının Perkütan Tedavisinde Hangi Litotriptör Daha Etkilidir: Tek Başına Pnömotik mi veya Pnömotik/Ultrasonik Kombinasyonu mu? Türk Üroloji Dergisi 2007; 33: 302-307
  15. Türk C, Knoll T, Petrick A et al. Stone Relief. Endourology Techniques, Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy. EAU Guidelines on Urolithiasis 2013;31-33
  16. Eren MT, İnci K, Tombul T et al. Geyik Boynuzu (Staghorn) Taşlarının Tedavisi: 199 Hastalık Perkütan Nefrolitotomi Deneyimi. Türk Üroloji Dergisi 2