Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Urolithiasis 2/2016

01.04.2016 | Original Paper

Comparison of microperc and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy for medium-sized lower calyx stones

verfasst von: Adem Tok, Fatih Akbulut, Ibrahim Buldu, Tuna Karatag, Onur Kucuktopcu, Gokhan Gurbuz, Okan Istanbulluoglu, Abdullah Armagan, Abdulkadir Tepeler, Ali Ihsan Tasci

Erschienen in: Urolithiasis | Ausgabe 2/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The objective of this study was to present the outcomes of comparative clinical study of microperc versus mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PNL) in the treatment of lower calyx stones of 10–20 mm. Patients with lower calyx stones treated with microperc (Group-1) or mini-PNL (Group-2) between 2011 and 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. Demographics of the patients were compared, including age, gender, BMI, stone size, laterality and procedural parameters (operation and fluoroscopy time), and outcomes (success and complication rates). A total of 98 patients were evaluated, assigned to Group-1 (n = 58) and to Group-2 (n = 40). Groups were statistically similar in terms of age, stone size, and BMI (p = 0.3, 0.07, 0.6, respectively). The mean procedure and fluoroscopy duration for Group-1 were 43.02 ± 27.98 min and 112.05 ± 72.5 s, and 52.25 ± 23.09 min and 138.53 ± 56.39 s in Group-2 (p = 0.006 and 0.006). The mean hematocrit drop was significantly higher in Group-2 compared to Group-1 (3.98 vs. 1.96 %; p < 0.001); however, none of the cases required blood transfusion. Overall complication rates exhibited no statistically significant difference (p = 0.57). Stone-free status was similar (86.2 vs. 82.5 %, p = 0.66). The tubeless procedure rate was significantly higher in Group-1 (p < 0.001). In Group-2, duration of hospitalization was significantly longer than in Group-1 (2.63 vs. 1.55 days; p < 0.01). Outcomes of the present retrospective study show that microperc is a treatment option for medium-sized lower calyx stone, being associated with lower blood loss, procedure, reduced fluoroscopy and hospitalization time, and a higher tubeless rate.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Türk C, Knoll T, Petrik A, Sarica K, Skolarikos A, Straub A, Seitz C (2013) Guidelines on urolithiasis. European Urology Association, Arnhem, pp 1–104 Türk C, Knoll T, Petrik A, Sarica K, Skolarikos A, Straub A, Seitz C (2013) Guidelines on urolithiasis. European Urology Association, Arnhem, pp 1–104
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Donaldson JF, Lardas M, Scrimgeour D, Stewart F, MacLennan S, Lam TB, McClinton S (2014) Systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical effectiveness of shock wave lithotripsy, retrograde intrarenal surgery, and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for lower-pole renal stones. Eur Urol 67:612–616CrossRefPubMed Donaldson JF, Lardas M, Scrimgeour D, Stewart F, MacLennan S, Lam TB, McClinton S (2014) Systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical effectiveness of shock wave lithotripsy, retrograde intrarenal surgery, and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for lower-pole renal stones. Eur Urol 67:612–616CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Albala DM, Assimos DG, Clayman RV, Denstedt JD, Grasso M, Gutierrez-Aceves J et al (2001) Lower pole I: a prospective randomized trial of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrostolithotomy for lower-pole nephrolithiasis—initial results. J Urol 166:2072–2080CrossRefPubMed Albala DM, Assimos DG, Clayman RV, Denstedt JD, Grasso M, Gutierrez-Aceves J et al (2001) Lower pole I: a prospective randomized trial of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrostolithotomy for lower-pole nephrolithiasis—initial results. J Urol 166:2072–2080CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Pearle MS, Lingeman JE, Leveillee R et al (2005) Prospective, randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi 1 cm or less. J Urol 173:2005–2009CrossRefPubMed Pearle MS, Lingeman JE, Leveillee R et al (2005) Prospective, randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi 1 cm or less. J Urol 173:2005–2009CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Resorlu B, Oguz U, Resorlu EB, Oztuna D, Unsal A (2012) The impact of pelvicaliceal anatomy on the success of retrograde intrarenal surgery in patients with lower pole renal Stones. Urology 79:61–66CrossRefPubMed Resorlu B, Oguz U, Resorlu EB, Oztuna D, Unsal A (2012) The impact of pelvicaliceal anatomy on the success of retrograde intrarenal surgery in patients with lower pole renal Stones. Urology 79:61–66CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Nagele U, Schilling D, Sievert KD, Stenzl A, Kuczyk M (2008) Management of lower-pole stones of 0.8–1.5 cm maximal diameter by the minimally invasive percutaneous approach. J Endourol 22:1851–1853CrossRefPubMed Nagele U, Schilling D, Sievert KD, Stenzl A, Kuczyk M (2008) Management of lower-pole stones of 0.8–1.5 cm maximal diameter by the minimally invasive percutaneous approach. J Endourol 22:1851–1853CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Kirac M, Bozkurt ÖF, Tunc L, Guneri C, Unsal A, Biri H (2013) Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of lower-pole renal stones with a diameter of smaller than 15 mm. Urolithiasis 41:241–246CrossRefPubMed Kirac M, Bozkurt ÖF, Tunc L, Guneri C, Unsal A, Biri H (2013) Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of lower-pole renal stones with a diameter of smaller than 15 mm. Urolithiasis 41:241–246CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Tepeler A, Armagan A, Sancaktutar AA et al (2013) The role of microperc in the treatment of symptomatic lower pole renal calculi. J Endourol 27:13–18CrossRefPubMed Tepeler A, Armagan A, Sancaktutar AA et al (2013) The role of microperc in the treatment of symptomatic lower pole renal calculi. J Endourol 27:13–18CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Sampaio FJ, Aragao AH (1994) Limitations of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for lower caliceal stones: anatomic insight. J Endourol 8:241–247CrossRefPubMed Sampaio FJ, Aragao AH (1994) Limitations of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for lower caliceal stones: anatomic insight. J Endourol 8:241–247CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Elbahnasy AM, Shalhav AL, Hoenig DM, Elashry OM, Smith DS, McDougall EM, Clayman RV (1998) Lower caliceal stone clearance after shock wave lithotripsy or ureteroscopy: the impact of lower pole radiographic anatomy. J Urol 159:676–682CrossRefPubMed Elbahnasy AM, Shalhav AL, Hoenig DM, Elashry OM, Smith DS, McDougall EM, Clayman RV (1998) Lower caliceal stone clearance after shock wave lithotripsy or ureteroscopy: the impact of lower pole radiographic anatomy. J Urol 159:676–682CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Lingeman JE, Siegel YI, Steele B, Nyhuis AW, Woods JR (1994) Management of lower pole nephrolithiasis: a critical analysis. J Urol 151:663–667PubMed Lingeman JE, Siegel YI, Steele B, Nyhuis AW, Woods JR (1994) Management of lower pole nephrolithiasis: a critical analysis. J Urol 151:663–667PubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Ozturk U, Sener NC, Goktug HN, Nalbant I, Gucuk A, Imamoglu MA (2013) Comparison of percutaneous nephrolithotomy, shock wave lithotripsy, and retrograde intrarenal surgery for lower pole renal calculi 10–20 mm. Urol Int 91:345–349CrossRefPubMed Ozturk U, Sener NC, Goktug HN, Nalbant I, Gucuk A, Imamoglu MA (2013) Comparison of percutaneous nephrolithotomy, shock wave lithotripsy, and retrograde intrarenal surgery for lower pole renal calculi 10–20 mm. Urol Int 91:345–349CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Jackman SV, Hedican S, Peters CA, Docimo SG (1998) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in infants and preschool age children: experience with a new technique. Urology 52:697–701CrossRefPubMed Jackman SV, Hedican S, Peters CA, Docimo SG (1998) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in infants and preschool age children: experience with a new technique. Urology 52:697–701CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Helal M, Black T, Lockhart J, Figueroa TE (1997) The Hickman peel-away sheath: alternative for pediatric percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 11:171–172CrossRefPubMed Helal M, Black T, Lockhart J, Figueroa TE (1997) The Hickman peel-away sheath: alternative for pediatric percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 11:171–172CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Bader MJ, Gratzke C, Seitz M, Sharma R, Stief CG, Desai M (2011) The “all-seeing needle”: initial results of an optical puncture system confirming access in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 59:1054–1059CrossRefPubMed Bader MJ, Gratzke C, Seitz M, Sharma R, Stief CG, Desai M (2011) The “all-seeing needle”: initial results of an optical puncture system confirming access in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 59:1054–1059CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Desai MR, Sharma R, Mishra S, Sabnis RB, Stief C, Bader M (2011) Single-step percutaneous nephrolithotomy (microperc): the initial clinical report. J Urol 186:140–145CrossRefPubMed Desai MR, Sharma R, Mishra S, Sabnis RB, Stief C, Bader M (2011) Single-step percutaneous nephrolithotomy (microperc): the initial clinical report. J Urol 186:140–145CrossRefPubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Kiremit MC, Guven S, Sarica K, Ozturk A, Buldu İ, Kafkasli A (2015) Contemporary management of medium-sized (10–20 mm) renal stones: a retrospective multicenter observational study. J Endourol 29(7):838–843CrossRefPubMed Kiremit MC, Guven S, Sarica K, Ozturk A, Buldu İ, Kafkasli A (2015) Contemporary management of medium-sized (10–20 mm) renal stones: a retrospective multicenter observational study. J Endourol 29(7):838–843CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Comparison of microperc and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy for medium-sized lower calyx stones
verfasst von
Adem Tok
Fatih Akbulut
Ibrahim Buldu
Tuna Karatag
Onur Kucuktopcu
Gokhan Gurbuz
Okan Istanbulluoglu
Abdullah Armagan
Abdulkadir Tepeler
Ali Ihsan Tasci
Publikationsdatum
01.04.2016
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Urolithiasis / Ausgabe 2/2016
Print ISSN: 2194-7228
Elektronische ISSN: 2194-7236
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-015-0804-2

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2016

Urolithiasis 2/2016 Zur Ausgabe

Update Urologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.