Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Urolithiasis 3/2018

05.06.2017 | Original Paper

Which way is best for stone fragments and dust extraction during percutaneous nephrolithotomy

verfasst von: Bulent Kati, Eyyup Sabri Pelit, Ismail Yagmur, Yigit Akin, Halil Ciftci, Ercan Yeni

Erschienen in: Urolithiasis | Ausgabe 3/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is a commonly used type of minimally invasive treatment in kidney stone surgeries. Surgical success is assessed according to residual stone amount after surgery. The purpose of this study is to compare the two methods’ success and practicality that are applied after the fracture of the stone in the patients who applied PCNL and which enable the removal of the residual stones. Among 102 patients who underwent a single-session of PCNL at our department between June 2015 and November 2016 were evaluated. Previously identified irrigation method and our aspiration method which described used in post-operative patients divided into two groups of residual fragments was assessed by computed tomography. The results were evaluated in statistical analyses. Significant p was accepted as p < 0.05. The age and gender distribution of patients in the irrigation and aspiration groups did not differ significantly (p > 0.05). In irrigation and aspiration groups, stone size did not differ significantly (p > 0.05). The amount of residue stones and dust remaining in the irrigation group was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than the aspiration group. Although many methods have been tried before, we think that the aspiration method we have described is a cheaper, more effective and feasible option.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Ramakumar S, Segura JW (2000) Renal calculi. Percutaneous management. Urol Clin N Am 27:617–622CrossRef Ramakumar S, Segura JW (2000) Renal calculi. Percutaneous management. Urol Clin N Am 27:617–622CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Osman MM, Alfano Y, Kamp S et al (2005) 5-year follow-up of patients with clinically insignificant residual fragments after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. Eur Urol 47:860–864CrossRefPubMed Osman MM, Alfano Y, Kamp S et al (2005) 5-year follow-up of patients with clinically insignificant residual fragments after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. Eur Urol 47:860–864CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Pearle MS, Watamull LM, Mullican MA (1999) Sensitivity of noncontrast helical computerized tomography and plain film radiography compared to flexible nephroscopy for detecting residual fragments after percutaneous nephrostolithotomy. J Urol 162:23–26CrossRefPubMed Pearle MS, Watamull LM, Mullican MA (1999) Sensitivity of noncontrast helical computerized tomography and plain film radiography compared to flexible nephroscopy for detecting residual fragments after percutaneous nephrostolithotomy. J Urol 162:23–26CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Turk C, Knoll T, Petrik A, Sarica K, Straub M, Seitz C (2011) Residual stones, EAU guidelines of urolithiasis, vol 61. European Association of Urology (EAU), Arnhem Turk C, Knoll T, Petrik A, Sarica K, Straub M, Seitz C (2011) Residual stones, EAU guidelines of urolithiasis, vol 61. European Association of Urology (EAU), Arnhem
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Altunrende F, Tefekli A, Stein RJ, Autorino R, Yuruk E, Laydner H (2011) Clinically insignificant residual fragments after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: medium-term follow-up. J Endourol 25(6):941–945CrossRefPubMed Altunrende F, Tefekli A, Stein RJ, Autorino R, Yuruk E, Laydner H (2011) Clinically insignificant residual fragments after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: medium-term follow-up. J Endourol 25(6):941–945CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Panah A, Masood J, Zaman F, Papatsoris AG, El-Husseiny T, Buchholz N (2009) A technique to flush out renal stone fragments during percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 23(1):5–6CrossRefPubMed Panah A, Masood J, Zaman F, Papatsoris AG, El-Husseiny T, Buchholz N (2009) A technique to flush out renal stone fragments during percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 23(1):5–6CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Kim SC, Kuo RL, Lingeman JE (2003) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: an update. Curr Opin Urol 13(3):235–241CrossRefPubMed Kim SC, Kuo RL, Lingeman JE (2003) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: an update. Curr Opin Urol 13(3):235–241CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Turk C, Knoll T, Petrik A, Sarica K, Straub M, Seitz CS (2016) Residual stones, EAU guidelines of urolithiasis, vol 61. European Association of Urology (EAU), Arnhem Turk C, Knoll T, Petrik A, Sarica K, Straub M, Seitz CS (2016) Residual stones, EAU guidelines of urolithiasis, vol 61. European Association of Urology (EAU), Arnhem
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Khaitan A, Gupta NP, Hemal AK, Dogra PN, Seth A, Aron M (2002) Post-ESWL, clinically insignificant residual stones: reality or myth? Urology 59:20–24CrossRefPubMed Khaitan A, Gupta NP, Hemal AK, Dogra PN, Seth A, Aron M (2002) Post-ESWL, clinically insignificant residual stones: reality or myth? Urology 59:20–24CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Daggett LM, Harbaugh BL, Collum LA (2002) Post-ESWL, clinically insignificant residual stones: reality or myth? Urology 59:20–24 Daggett LM, Harbaugh BL, Collum LA (2002) Post-ESWL, clinically insignificant residual stones: reality or myth? Urology 59:20–24
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Mager R, Balzereit C, Hüsch T, Herrmann T, Nicklas A, Nagele U, Haferkamp A, Schilling D (2016) Clearance of stone fragments and stone dust by continuous flow hydrodynamics in percutaneous renal surgery: an in vitro study. J Endourol 30(4):441–446CrossRefPubMed Mager R, Balzereit C, Hüsch T, Herrmann T, Nicklas A, Nagele U, Haferkamp A, Schilling D (2016) Clearance of stone fragments and stone dust by continuous flow hydrodynamics in percutaneous renal surgery: an in vitro study. J Endourol 30(4):441–446CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Antonelli JA, Beardsley H, Faddegon S, Morgan MS, Gahan JC, Pearle MS, Cadeddu JA (2016) A novel device to prevent stone fragment migration during percutaneous lithotripsy: results from an in vitro kidney model. J Endourol 30(11):1239–1243CrossRefPubMed Antonelli JA, Beardsley H, Faddegon S, Morgan MS, Gahan JC, Pearle MS, Cadeddu JA (2016) A novel device to prevent stone fragment migration during percutaneous lithotripsy: results from an in vitro kidney model. J Endourol 30(11):1239–1243CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Hein S, Schoenthaler M, Wilhelm K, Schlager D, Thiel K, Brandmann M, Richter K, Grunwald I, Wetterauer U, Miernik A (2016) Novel biocompatible adhesive for intrarenal embedding and endoscopic removal of small residual fragments after minimally invasive stone treatment in an ex vivo porcine kidney model: initial evaluation of a prototype. J Urol 196(6):1772–1777CrossRefPubMed Hein S, Schoenthaler M, Wilhelm K, Schlager D, Thiel K, Brandmann M, Richter K, Grunwald I, Wetterauer U, Miernik A (2016) Novel biocompatible adhesive for intrarenal embedding and endoscopic removal of small residual fragments after minimally invasive stone treatment in an ex vivo porcine kidney model: initial evaluation of a prototype. J Urol 196(6):1772–1777CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Which way is best for stone fragments and dust extraction during percutaneous nephrolithotomy
verfasst von
Bulent Kati
Eyyup Sabri Pelit
Ismail Yagmur
Yigit Akin
Halil Ciftci
Ercan Yeni
Publikationsdatum
05.06.2017
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Urolithiasis / Ausgabe 3/2018
Print ISSN: 2194-7228
Elektronische ISSN: 2194-7236
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-017-0987-9

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2018

Urolithiasis 3/2018 Zur Ausgabe

Update Urologie

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