DOI 10.1007/s00345-022-04254-2
Non-papillary prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal abnormalities: single-institution experience.
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of non-papillary prone PCNL for the treatment of patients with renal abnormalities.
METHODS
An observational retrospective cohort study including PCNL cases of patients with renal abnormalities was performed. The following inclusion criteria were applied: renal stones > 1.5 cm with maximal diameter, anatomical malformations of affected kidney (malrotated kidneys, horseshoe kidneys and kidneys with complete duplicated systems, medullary sponge kidney), patients treated with standard (30Fr) PCNL or mini-PCNL (22Fr). The lithotripsy was performed using the Lithoclast Master or the Lithoclast® Trilogy (EMS Medical, Nyon, Switzerland).
RESULTS
Overall, 57 patients, 35 males, and 22 females with any renal malformation underwent non-papillary prone PCNL. Our study included 25 patients with horseshoe kidneys, 21 with malrotated kidneys, 9 with kidneys with duplicated pelvicalyceal systems and 2 with medullary sponge kidneys. The mean cumulative stone size was 36 ± 1.4 mm and most of the stones were in the lower calyceal group (36.9%) and in the pelvis (27.2%). The stone-free rate (SFR) was 84.2% and the mean hospitalization time was 2.7 ± 0.7 days. In total, postoperative complications were developed in six patients (10.5%), half of them presenting fever and the other half requiring blood transfusion (Grade II).
CONCLUSION
The PCNL is the method of choice for treating large stones in anomalous kidneys. The generally accepted panacea that only a papillary puncture is safe is questioned by our results. Based on our experience, a non-papillary puncture proved to be a safe and effective procedure.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.