Abstract：Objective:To assess the factors that influence operative time during percutanous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) with reformative lateral position. Methods:The clinical record and surgical outcome of 233 patients treated with PCNL in our hospital between 2005 and 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. Factors such as sex, age, stone size, stone type, stone positive, number of tracks, history of shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL), presence of hydronephrosis and surgical experience were analysed and their impact on the operative time was investigated by statistical analysis. Results:The mean operative time was (91.1±36.3)min. The sex, age and history of ESWL had no effects on the operative time. There was a positive correlation between the stone size and operative time (P＜0.05). Complex stone, calix access, multiple tracks and presence of hydronephrosis had significant impact on the operative time, there was an increase in the operative time when compared to the relevant control (P＜0.05). Duration of the operation was also observed to decrease with increased surgical experience. Conclusions:Stone size, stone type, stone position, number of tracks, hydronephrosis and surgical experience are factors that influence the operative time of PCNL with reformative lateral position.
[1]Skolarikos A, Alivizatos G, de la Rosette JJ. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy and its legacy. Eur Urol, 2005, 47(1):22-28. [2]El-Husseiny T, Moraitis K, Maan Z, et al. Percutaneous endourologic procedures in high-risk patients in the lateral decubitus position under regional anesthesia. J Endourol, 2009, 23(10):1603-1606. [3]Antonelli JA, Pearle MS. Advances in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Urol Clin North Am, 2013,40(1),99-113. [4]Falahatkar S, Moghaddam KG, Kazemnezhad E, et al. Factors affecting operative time during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: our experience with the complete supine position. J Endourol, 2011, 25 (12):1831-1836. [5]Akman T, Binbay M, AkcayM, et al. Variables that influence operative time during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: an analysis of 1897 cases. J Endourol, 2011, 25(8): 1269-1273. [6]Sergeyev I, Koi PT, Jacobs SL, et al. Outcome of percutaneous surgery stratified according to body mass index and kidney stone size. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech, 2007, 17(3):179-183. [7]Aron M, Goel R, Kesarwani PK, et al. Upper pole acess for complex lower pole renal calculi. BJU Int, 2004, 94(6): 849-852. [8]el-Nahas AR, Eraky I, Shokeir AA, et al. Factors affecting stone-free rate and complications of percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treatment of staghorn stone. Urology,2012,79(6):1236-1241. [9]Yuruk E, Tefekli A, Sari E, et al. Does previous extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy affect the performance and outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy? J Urol,2009,181(2):663-667. [10]Resorlu B, Kara C, Senocak C, et al. Effect of previous open renal surgery and failed extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy on the performance and outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol,2010,24(1):13-16. [11]Olbert PJ, Hegele A, Schrader AJ, et al. Pre- and perioperative predictors of short-term clinical outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy. Urol Res,2007,35(5):225-230. [12]Jang WS, Choi KH, Yang SC, et al. The Learning Curve for Flank Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Kidney Calculi: A Single Surgeon's Experience. Korean J Urol,2011,52(4):284-288. [13]Allen D, O'Brien T, Tiptaft R, et al. Defining the learning curve for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol,2005,19(3):279-282.
