Influence of renal needle puncture site differences on stone removal effects, operation related clinical indicators and complications of patients with complicated renal calculi by minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy with lithotomy
Wu Yunhai1, Hao Qiang1, Hu Bing1, Jia Hongtao2
1Department of Urology, Yunxi People's Hospital, Shiyan 442600, China; 2Department of Urology, Yunxi People's Hospital
Abstract：Objective: To investigate the influence of renal needle puncture site differences on stone removal effects, operation related clinical indicators and complications of patients with complicated renal calculi by minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy with lithotomy (MPCNL). Methods: 150 patients with complicated renal calculi treated by MPCNL were chosen in the period from April 2015 to April 2017 in our hospital and randomly divided into group A (n=50) subject to upper calyx puncture, group B (n=50) subject to middle calyx puncture, and group C (n=50) undergoing lower calyx puncture. The stone clearance rate in 48 h and 3 months after operation, the passageway establishment time, operation time, Hb decline amount, hospital stay, multi-channel establishment rate and postoperative complication incidence in all groups were compared. Results: There was no significant difference in the stone clearance rate in 48 h and 3 months after operation among 3 groups (P<0.05). The passageway establishment time in group C was significantly longer than in groups A and B (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the operation time, Hb decline amount, hospital stay time and multi-channel establishment rate among three groups (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the postoperative complication incidence among three groups (P<0.05). Conclusions: Renal needle puncture in upper calyx, middle calyx and lower calyx applied on patients with complicated renal calculi treated by MPCNL possesses the same clinical effects and safety, but the renal needle puncture in the lower calyx may cause the longer puncture time.
吴运海, 郝强, 胡彬, 贾洪涛. 肾盏穿刺部位差异对微创经皮肾镜取石术治疗复杂性肾结石的影响[J]. 微创泌尿外科杂志, 2018, 7(6): 375-378.
Wu Yunhai, Hao Qiang, Hu Bing, Jia Hongtao. Influence of renal needle puncture site differences on stone removal effects, operation related clinical indicators and complications of patients with complicated renal calculi by minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy with lithotomy. JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE UROLOGY, 2018, 7(6): 375-378.
[1] Skolarikos A, Dellis A, Knoll T.Ureteropelvic obstruction and renal stones: etiology and treatment. Urolithiasis, 2015,43(1):5-12. [2] Daga S, Wagaskar VG, Tanwar H, et al.Efficacy of medical expulsive therapy in renal calculi less than or equal to 5 millimetres in size. Urol J, 2016,13(6):2893-2898. [3] Chew BH, Zavaglia B, Paterson RF, et al.A multicenter comparison of the safety and effectiveness of ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy in obese and normal weight patients. J Endourol, 2013,27(6):710-714. [4] Süelozgen T, Budak S, Celik O, et al.Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with a solitary kidney.Archivio italiano di urologia, andrologia: organo ufficiale. Società Italiana Di Ecografia Urologicae Nefrologica, 2014,86(4):253-256. [5] Ercil H, Alma E, Bas O, et al.Treatment of moderate sized renal pelvis calculi: stone clearance time comparison of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and retrograde intrarenal surgery. Urol J, 2016,13(1):2490-2495. [6] Preminger GM, Assimos DG, Lingeman JE, et al.Chapter 1: AUA guideline on management of staghorn calculi: diagnosis and treatment recommendations. J Urol, 2005,173(6):1991-2000. [7] Lunardi P, Timsit MO, Roumiguie M, et al.Single procedure treatment of complex nephrolithiasis: about a modern series of anatrophic nephrolithotomy. Prog Urol, 2015,25(2):90-95. [8] Osman Y, Harraz AM, El-Nahas AR, et al.Clinically insignificant residual fragments: an acceptable term in the computed tomography era? Urology, 2013,81(4):723-726. [9] Aboumarzouk OM, Monga M, Kata SG, et al.Flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy for stones > 2 cm: A systematic review and Meta-Analysis. J Endourol, 2012,26(10):1257-1263. [10] Salerno A, Nappo SG, Matarazzo E, et al.Treatment of pediatric renal stones in a Western country: a changing pattern. J Pediatr Surg, 2013,48(4):835-839. [11] Fuchs GJ.Complications of stone disease in the 21st century--can noninvasive and minimally invasive treatment modalities improve the overall renal health of stone formers? J Urol, 2014,192(5):1322-1323. [12] De SB, Autorino R, Kim FJ, et al.Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol, 2015,67(1):125-137. [13] Trew J, Cornfield J.A comparison of treatment modalities in renal and ureteral calculi. Open J Urol, 2017,7(3):47-53. [14] Lee SH, Kim TH, Myung SC, et al.Effectiveness of flexible ureteroscopic stone removal for treating ureteral and ipsilateral renal stones: a single-center experience. Korean J Urol, 2013,54(6):377-382. [15] Zeng G, Zhao Z, Wan S, et al.Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy for simple and complex renal caliceal stones: a comparative analysis of more than 10,000 cases. J Endourol, 2013,27(10):1203-1208. [16] Ali S, Kumar N, Baloch U.Outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Coll Physicians Surg Pak, 2014,24(4):261-264.
