Zeng Guohua, Zhu Wei, Liu Yang, Fan Junhong, Lam Wayne, Lan Yu, Cai Chao, Deng Tuo, Li Xiaohang, Zhao Zhijian
1 Department of Urology, Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University , Guangzhou, China .
2 Guangdong Key Laboratory of Urology, Guangzhou Institute of Urology , Guangzhou, China .
J Endourol. 2017 Nov;31(11):1157-1163. doi: 10.1089/end.2017.0558. Epub 2017 Oct 10.
The study sought to compare the procedural and clinical results of super-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SMP) with the use of first- and new-generation devices.
A prospective, comparative cohort study was carried out between February 2013 and January 2017. Patients who underwent either first- or new-generation SMP were eligible for the study. Inclusion criteria were adult patients with renal stone <4 cm, or in pediatric patients with renal stone <2.5 cm with a history of failed extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. The primary outcome of the present study was the operating time, which was calculated from the starting of percutaneous puncture to the wound closure. Secondary outcomes were the stone-free rate (SFR), blood loss (hemoglobin decrease), hospital stay, and postoperative complications.
One hundred fifty-six consecutive patients who underwent SMP for treatment of renal stones were eligible for the study, with the first 85 patients undergoing SMP with the first-generation device, and the remaining 71 consecutive patients being treated with the new-generation SMP system. The two groups of patients had comparable demographic data, including age, BMI, stone size, Guy's score, stone location, comorbidities, grade of hydronephrosis, and history of urinary tract infection. The new-generation SMP had a shorter operation time (39.3 vs 50.5 min, p = 0.016) and shorter postoperative hospitalization time (2.1 vs 3.0 days, p < 0.001) than the first-generation SMP. No significant difference existed between the two groups for SFR, hemoglobin decrease, and tubeless rate. The overall operative complication rates using the Clavien-Dindo grading system were similar between the two cohorts of patients.
The clinical outcomes of the new-generation SMP in patients with moderate-sized renal stone were comparable when compared with the first-generation SMP. New-generation SMP system using an irrigation/suction sheath improved intraoperative irrigation, a more efficient hydrodynamic mechanism for retrieval of fragments. This may account for the shorter operative time than the first-generation SMP system demonstrated in this study.
本研究旨在比较使用第一代和新一代设备进行超微经皮肾镜取石术(SMP)的手术过程及临床结果。
2013年2月至2017年1月期间进行了一项前瞻性比较队列研究。接受第一代或新一代SMP的患者符合本研究条件。纳入标准为肾结石<4 cm的成年患者,或体外冲击波碎石术失败史的肾结石<2.5 cm的儿科患者。本研究的主要结局是手术时间,从经皮穿刺开始至伤口缝合计算得出。次要结局包括结石清除率(SFR)、失血量(血红蛋白下降)、住院时间和术后并发症。
156例连续接受SMP治疗肾结石的患者符合本研究条件,前85例患者使用第一代设备进行SMP,其余71例连续患者使用新一代SMP系统治疗。两组患者的人口统计学数据具有可比性,包括年龄、体重指数、结石大小、盖氏评分、结石位置、合并症、肾积水程度和尿路感染史。新一代SMP的手术时间(39.3对50.5分钟,p = 0.016)和术后住院时间(2.1对3.0天,p < 0.001)均短于第一代SMP。两组在SFR、血红蛋白下降和无管率方面无显著差异。使用Clavien-Dindo分级系统的总体手术并发症发生率在两组患者中相似。
与第一代SMP相比,新一代SMP在中等大小肾结石患者中的临床结局相当。使用冲洗/吸引鞘的新一代SMP系统改善了术中冲洗,是一种更有效的碎片取出流体动力机制。这可能是本研究中新一代SMP系统手术时间短于第一代的原因。