Search

Purpose: To evaluate the rate of and predictors of ureteral obstruction after mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) for kidney stones. Methods: We analyzed data from 263 consecutive patients who underwent mPCNL at a single tertiary referral academic between 01/2016 and 11/2022. Patient's demographics, stone characteristics, and operative data were collected. A nephrostomy tube was placed as the only exit strategy in each procedure. On postoperative day 2, an antegrade pyelography was performed to assess ureteral canalization. The nephrostomy tube was removed if ureteral canalization was successful. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression models were used to identify factors associated with a lack of ureteral canalization. Results: Overall, median (IQR) age and stone volume were 56 (47-65) years and 1.7 (0.8-4.2) cm3, respectively. Of 263, 55 (20.9%) patients showed ureteral obstruction during pyelography. Patients without ureteral canalization had larger stone volume (p < 0.001), longer operative time (p < 0.01), and higher rate of stones in the renal pelvis (p < 0.01) than those with normal pyelography. Length of stay was longer (p < 0.01), and postoperative complications (p = 0.03) were more frequent in patients without ureteral canalization. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that stone volume (OR 1.1, p = 0.02) and stone located in the renal pelvis (OR 2.2, p = 0.04) were independent predictors of transient ureteral obstruction, after accounting for operative time. Conclusion: One out of five patients showed transient ureteral obstruction after mPCNL. Patients with a higher stone burden and with stones in the renal pelvis are at higher risk of inadequate ureteral canalization. Internal drainage might be considered in these cases to avoid potential complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To study the feasibility and safety of One-Shot Dilatation (OSD), versus serial sequential dilatation in tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL). One Hundred and Fifty patients were randomised into two groups; Group A (One-Shot Dilatation), Group B (Serial Dilatation). Twenty-one patients were excluded from the study. Detailed history was taken and full physical examination was performed. Pre-operative routine laboratory investigations were done. Also, non-contrast Computed Tomography of the Urinary Tract (CTUT) and plain urinary tract x-ray were done. Intra-operative assessments of dilatation, total operative, total fluoroscopy and fluoroscopy during dilatation durations were recorded, as well as estimated blood loss. Post-operatively haemoglobin, creatinine levels and CTUT were performed for all patients. Complications, as urinary leakage time, analgesic requirements and hospitalization time were measured. There were statistically significant differences in the intraoperative durations, where Group A had shorter dilatation time, fluoroscopy time during dilatation and total operative time. Group B had a higher complications rate than Group A; 37.9%, 11.3%, respectively. Also, Group B showed haemoglobin drop by 0.44 mg/dl higher than Group A. More doses of analgesia were required for Group B. Hospitalization time and rate of urinary leakage were both in favour of Group A. For patients undergoing Tubeless PCNL, we have concluded that one-shot dilatation seems to be a safer and more feasible technique than Serial dilatation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although PCNL has been used for a long time to treat nephrolithiasis, there is still contradictory information concerning the use of the dilation method. In this study, we aimed to compare conventional sequential Amplatz dilatation (SAD) using ten dilators and a method using three dilators (12, 20, and 30 Fr), which we named "three-shot dilatation" (3SD), in terms of fluoroscopy time (FT), operation time, bleeding and stone-free rates. Methods: The study included patients who underwent PCNL with the SAD and 3SD methods. A different surgeon with extensive endourology experience applied each technique. One of the surgeons operated on the patients using the SAD method with ten dilators, and the other surgeon performed the operations using the 3SD method involving three Amplatz dilators (12, 20, and 30 Fr). Results: A total of 283 patients, 138 in the 3SD group and 145 in the SAD group, were included in the study. The mean age of the patients was 47.32 ± 13.71 years. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding preoperative characteristics (p > 0.05). The FTs of access 2, total access, and total operation were significantly shorter in the 3SD group (p = 0.0001). The decrease in hemoglobin was statistically significant in the 3SD group compared to the SAD group (p = 0.022), while the blood transfusion requirements of the groups were similar (p = 0.176). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding stone-free rates (p = 0.973). In four patients in the SAD group, re-access was necessary due to the loss of passage due to the guide wire slipping out of its place. Conclusion: Intraoperative FT can be shortened using the described 3SD method without compromising surgical safety. However, this method can be used as an intermediate step in the transition to one-shot dilation by surgeons experienced in performing SAD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate renal parenchymal trauma of two-step dilation compared to the conventional Amplatz gradual dilation during percutaneous nephrolithotomy on a porcine model. Materials and Methods: A nonpapillary percutaneous access tract was established under fluoroscopic guidance in both kidneys of four female pigs. On the right kidney of each pig, gradual dilation was performed using an Amplatz dilator set with a gradual dilation to 30 Fr, whereas on the left, a two-step dilation was utilized using only 16 Fr and 30 Fr dilators. Two of the animals were euthanized immediately after the procedure and the remaining two 1 month later. The pigs that were kept alive underwent a contrast-enhanced computed tomography immediately, 15, and 30 days postoperatively. A dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA) scintigraphy and single-photon emission computed tomography-computed tomography (CT) were also performed after the last CT and afterward, the pigs were sacrificed. All kidneys were harvested for pathohistological examination. Results: The follow-up radiologic imaging showed similar parenchymal damage caused by the compared dilation techniques and an expected reduction in scar size in the later scans. No scar was identified by DMSA in any kidney. Gross and microscopic examinations conducted both on the kidneys that were harvested immediately after the procedure and the ones from the animals that were left to heal, revealed no significant differences in tissue damage, grade of fibrosis, or inflammation depending on the dilation method. Conclusions: Our study showed no inferior outcomes caused by two-step dilation compared to gradual dilation regarding renal parenchymal damage following a nonpapillary puncture. In fact, postoperative imaging findings suggested a trend toward better healing and less scar tissue when the two-step method was used. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To evaluate the current practice of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), conducting a worldwide survey among urologists with a special interest in endo-urology. Methods: A 22-question survey was specifically developed by the European Association of Urology (EAU) young academic urologists (YAU) and uro-technology (ESUT) groups and globally distributed via SurveyMonkey to almost 2000 members of Endourology Society. The questionnaire included questions dedicated to the demographics and general practice of the participating urologists. Results: In total, 441 responses (male/female ratio – 418/23) were received. A comparatively higher percentage of specialists (56.2%) practiced in academic institutions and had specific endo-urological fellowship training (56.7%). The classical prone PCNL remained the most practiced approach among the surveyed specialists, 47.7% stated to always do prone PCNLs, while 51.8% of respondents used multiple positioning options as required. The PCNL tract was mostly performed by urologists (84.3%) and fluoroscopic guidance was still predominantly used by 74.5% of respondents. The most practiced tract dilation method was balloon dilator used by 42% of respondents. Most of the surveyed urologists had ultrasonic, pneumatic or laser lithotripsy devices in their armamentarium. The use of some form of post-procedural drainage was reported in 85.1% of respondents, whereas tubeless PCNL remained a fairly uncommon practice. Conclusion: The majority of urologists still use prone positioning, get their own access under fluoroscopy guidance and use a balloon for tract dilation. However, we also identified that when necessary, urologists will deviate from routine practice and change strategy, adopting other approaches for PCNL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Bosphorus Medical Journal / Boğaziçi Tıp Dergisi is the property of KARE Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)