Journals / Erciyes Tıp Dergisi / 2013 / Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 2

Böbrek taşı olgularında standart perkütan nefrolitotomi deneyimlerimiz

Our Experience of standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Kidney stones

Pages
68–71
Publication Date
2022-10-17
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: PNL is the first line of treatment in selected cases with high success and acceptable copmlication rates.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: In this study, we aimed to present the results of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PNL) performed in our clinic.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: In our clinic, 1310 of 1350 renal patients underwent Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PNL).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: PNL is the first line of treatment in selected cases with high success and acceptable copmlication rates.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2007 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: In this study, we aimed to present the results of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PNL) performed in our clinic. Materials and Methods: In our clinic, 1310 of 1350 renal patients underwent Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PNL). Between January 2007 and December 2012. Results: Mean patient age was 44.54 (5-73) Mean operative time was 113.4 (45-210) min and mean stone size was 675.2 (110-1750) mm2, Stone free rate was 95.7% (1293/1350), We encountered 4 (0.29%) AV fistulas, 3 (0.2%) colon injuries and 3 (0.2%) hemothorax, One patient had undergone nephrectomy prior to surgery. Conclusion: PNL is the first line of treatment in selected cases with high success and acceptable copmlication rates.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmada perkutan nefrolitotomi (PNL) uygulamasıyla ilgili deneyimlerimizin bildirilmesi amacı ile kliniğimizde uygulanan standart PNL yönteminin sonuçları incelendi. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Kliniğimizde Ocak 2007-Aralık 2012 tarihleri arasında böbrek taşı olan 1310 olguda 1350 renal üniteye uygulanan standart PNL yönteminin sonuçları incelendi. Bulgular: Hastaların yaş ortalaması 44,54 (5-73) idi. Ortalama operasyon süresi 113,4 (45-210) dk. taş alanı ise 675,2 (110- 1750) mm2 idi. Taşsızlığa ulaşma oranımız klinik önemsiz fragmanlar dahil 1293 (%95,7) olarak hesaplandı. PNL uyguladığımız hastalarımızdan 4 (%0,29) tanesinde AV fistül, 3 (%0,2) tanesinde kolon yaralanması, 3 (%0,2) tanesinde ise hemoto- raks gelişirken 1 hastamıza nefrektomi uygulandı. Sonuç: Uygun vakalarda PNL, günümüzde böbrek taşı tedavisinde başarıya ulaşma ve kabul edilebilir komplikasyon oranları göz önüne alındığında ilk seneçek olma özelliğini korumaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

EKİCİ, M., SERTÇELİK, N., ŞENER, N. C., GÖKTUĞ, H. N. G., NALBANT, İ., ZENGİN, K. (2022). Böbrek taşı olgularında standart perkütan nefrolitotomi deneyimlerimiz. Erciyes Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 2, 68–71. https://ajindex.com/articles/502420

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Park S, Pearle MS. Urolithiasis: Update on Metabolic Evaluation of Sto- ne Formers. The Scientific World Journal 2005
  2. [CrossRef] 2. Özkeçeli R, Satar N. Üriner Sistem Taş Hastalığı Genel Bilgiler ve Etiyo- patogenez
  3. Anafarta K. Arıkan N. Bedük Y: Temel Üroloji 2008.s.471-7. 3. Turk C, Knoll T, Petrik A, Sarica K, Skolarikos A, Straub M, et al. Selec- tion of procedure for active removal of kidney stones. Guidelines on Urolithiasis, EUA 2012.p.46. 4. Uribarri J, Oh MS, Carroll HJ. The first kidney stone. Ann Intern Med 1989
  4. 111(12): 1006-9. [CrossRef] 5. Lingeman JE. Lifshitz DA. Evan AP Surgical management of urinary lithiasis. In: Walsh PC (Eds.). Campbell’s Urology. 8th ed. New York: Sounders
  5. 2002 (üroloji kitabı).s.3361-451. 6. Hasun R, Ryan PC, West AB, Fitzpatrick JM, Marberger M. Percutaneo- us coagulum nephrolithotripsy: a new approach. Br J Urol 1985
  6. 57(6): 605-9. [CrossRef] 7. Goldwasser B, John L, Carson CC, Dunnick NR. Factors effecting the success rate of percutaneous nephrolithotripsy and the incidence of retained fragments. J Urol 1986
  7. 136(2): 358-60. 8. Michaels EK, Fowler JE Jr, Manino M. Bacteriuria following ESWL of infected stones. J Urol 1988
  8. 140(2): 254-6. 9. Doré B, Conort P Irani J, Amiel J, Ferrière JM, Glémain P et al. Per- cutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in subjects over the age of 70: a multicentre retrospective study of 210 cases. Prog Urol 2004
  9. 14(6): 1140-5. 10. El-Nahas AR, Shokeir AA, El-Kenawy MR, Shoma AM, Eraky I, El- Assmy AM, et al. Safety and efficacy of supracostal percutaneous nephrolithotomy in pediatric patients. J Urol 2008
  10. 180(2): 676-80. [CrossRef] 11. Osman M, Wendt-Nordahl G, Heger K, Michel MS, Alken P Knoll T. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy with ultrasonography-guided renal access: experience from over 300 cases. BJU In.2005
  11. 96(6): 875-8. [CrossRef] 12. Lee KL, Stoller ML. Minimizing and managing bleeding after percuta- neus nephrolithotomy. Curr Opin Urol 2007
  12. 17(2): 120-4. [CrossRef] 13. Sofikerim M, Şahin A, Akdoğan B, Ekici S, Atsü N, Özgen S, ve ark.
  13. Perkütan Nefrolitotomi: 500 renal ünite sonuçlarımız. Üroloji Bülteni 2002
  14. de la Rosette JJ, Laguna MP Rassweiler JJ, Conort P Training in per- cutaneous nephrolithotomy-a critical review. J Eur Urol 2008
  15. 54(5): 994-1003. [CrossRef] 15. Mahboub MR. Shakibi MH. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with solitary kidney. Urol J 2008
  16. 5(1): 24-7. 16. Symons SJ, Ramachandran A, Kurien A, Baiysha R, Desai MR. Urolithi-