Falahatkar Siavash, Kazemnezhad Ehsan, Moghaddam Keivan Gholamjani, Kazemzadeh Majid, Asadollahzade Ahmad, Farzan Alireza, Damavand Reza Shahrokhi, Aval Hamidreza Baghani, Esmaeili Samaneh
Urology Research Center, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Urology Research Center, Razi Hospital, Rasht, I.R. Iran.
Can Urol Assoc J. 2013 May-Jun;7(5-6):E306-10. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.11307. Epub 2013 May 13.
Middle calyx access has been underused in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), especially in the supine position. We compared the safety and efficacy outcomes between middle calyx and lower calyx accesses in the complete supine PCNL in a non-randomized single-surgeon clinical study.
Between February 2008 and October 2011, 170 patients underwent posterior subcostal single tract complete supine PCNL with one-shot dilation and middle calyx (n = 48) and lower calyx (n = 122) accesses. Stone location and surgeon decision determined target calyx for access. Inclusion criteria were pelvis stones, staghorn stones and multiple location stones. Exclusion criteria were renal anomalies, only upper calyx stones, only middle calyx stones and only lower calyx stones. Important parameters were compared between the two groups. A p value of <0.05 was considered significant.
Two groups were similar in important patient- and stone-related parameters. Mean operative time (60.7 minutes), mean postoperative hospital stay (1.84 days) and mean hemoglobin drop (0.67 g/dL) in the middle calyx group were significantly lesser than in the lower calyx group (80.1 minutes, 2.19 days, 1.36 g/dL). The middle calyx group (89.6%; 79.6%) had a higher stone-free rate (p = 0.054) and efficiency quotient than the lower calyx group (76.2%; 61.6%). In the middle calyx group (10.4%; 2.1%), complication and transfusion rates were lesser (p > 0.05) than lower calyx group (14.8%; 7.4%). No significant difference (p = 0.40) was seen between two groups using the modified Clavien classification of complications.
Middle calyx can be an optimal access in PCNL with the complete supine position for many of upper urinary tract stones due to its superior outcomes.
在经皮肾镜取石术(PCNL)中,中盏入路的应用较少,尤其是在仰卧位时。在一项非随机单术者临床研究中,我们比较了完全仰卧位PCNL中中盏入路和下盏入路的安全性和疗效结果。
2008年2月至2011年10月期间,170例患者接受了肋下后单通道完全仰卧位PCNL,采用单次扩张,分别经中盏(n = 48)和下盏(n = 122)入路。结石位置和术者决策决定入路的目标肾盏。纳入标准为肾盂结石、鹿角形结石和多发结石。排除标准为肾脏异常、仅上盏结石、仅中盏结石和仅下盏结石。比较两组的重要参数。p值<0.05被认为具有统计学意义。
两组在重要的患者和结石相关参数方面相似。中盏组的平均手术时间(60.7分钟)、平均术后住院时间(1.84天)和平均血红蛋白下降幅度(0.67 g/dL)均显著低于下盏组(80.1分钟、2.19天、1.36 g/dL)。中盏组的无石率(89.6%;79.6%)和效率商高于下盏组(76.2%;61.6%)(p = 0.054)。中盏组的并发症和输血率(10.4%;2.1%)低于下盏组(14.8%;7.4%)(p>0.05)。使用改良的Clavien并发症分类法,两组之间未见显著差异(p = 0.40)。
由于中盏入路在完全仰卧位PCNL治疗许多上尿路结石时疗效更佳,因此它可能是一种最佳入路。