Tian Ye, Yang Xiushu, Luo Guangheng, Wang Yandong, Sun Zhaolin
Department of Urology, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, Guiyang, Guizhou, P.R.China.
Urol J. 2020 Jan 26;17(1):14-18. doi: 10.22037/uj.v0i0.4828.
To explore the feasibility and safety of ambulatory mPCNL (mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy) on upper urinary tract calculi.
Clinical data of 18 patients received ambulatory mPCNL during Aug. 2017 to Jan. 2018 and 23 patients treated with routine inpatient mPCNL of the corresponding period were collected. All the patients included received 16Fr channel PCNL under the guidance of Doppler ultrasound. A 6Fr double J stent was placed in the ureter for internal drainage, and either an indwelling 14Fr open nephrostomy tube was placed or the puncture channel was filled with absorbable hemostatic materials alone, depends on the bleeding condition of the puncture channel and the intraoperative conditions. Preoperative parameters and surgery time, complications, total hospitalization costs and hospital stay time between the two groups were compared.
Preoperative parameters regarding age (P=0.057), sex distribution (P=0.380), ASA score (P=0.388), Calculi CT value (P=0.697), and the S.T.O.N.E. score (P=0.122) were comparable between the two groups. Maximum diameter of calculi (cm) of the conventional hospitalization group, however, was larger than the ambulatory surgery group (P=0.041). There were no significant differences in the mean surgery time (P=0.146), postoperative hemoglobin drop (P=0.865), Calculi-free rate on the next day after surgery (P=0.083) and postoperative fever rate (P=0.200) between the two groups. With regard to tubeless rate (P<0.001), total hospitalization costs (P=0.003) and hospital stay time (P<0.001), there were significant advantage favored ambulatory mPCNL.
For patients with simple upper urinary tract calculi and relatively good performance status, ambulatory mPCNL is feasible as it's equally safe and efficient as compared with routine inpatient mPCNL. Moreover, ambulatory mPCNL decreases hospitalization costs and hospital stay time. Nevertheless, perioperative management should be carefully conducted, and well-designed studies are warranted.
探讨门诊微创经皮肾镜取石术(mPCNL)治疗上尿路结石的可行性及安全性。
收集2017年8月至2018年1月期间接受门诊mPCNL治疗的18例患者及同期接受常规住院mPCNL治疗的23例患者的临床资料。所有纳入患者均在多普勒超声引导下行16Fr通道PCNL。输尿管内放置6Fr双J支架管进行内引流,根据穿刺通道出血情况及术中情况,要么放置一根14Fr的留置开放式肾造瘘管,要么仅用可吸收止血材料填充穿刺通道。比较两组患者的术前参数、手术时间、并发症、总住院费用及住院时间。
两组患者术前年龄(P = 0.057)、性别分布(P = 0.380)、美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)评分(P = 0.388)、结石CT值(P = 0.697)及结石评分(S.T.O.N.E.评分,P = 0.122)等参数具有可比性。然而,常规住院组结石最大直径(cm)大于门诊手术组(P = 0.041)。两组患者平均手术时间(P = 0.146)、术后血红蛋白下降情况(P = 0.865)、术后次日结石清除率(P = 0.083)及术后发热率(P = 0.200)比较,差异均无统计学意义。在无管化率(P < 0.日01)、总住院费用(P = 0.003)及住院时间(P < 0.001)方面,门诊mPCNL具有显著优势。
对于上尿路结石病情简单、身体状况相对较好的患者,门诊mPCNL是可行的,与常规住院mPCNL相比,其安全性和有效性相当。此外,门诊mPCNL可降低住院费用及缩短住院时间。然而,围手术期管理应谨慎进行,需要开展设计良好的研究。