COMPARISON OF STONE FREE RATE OF STAGHORN STONE, RENAL PELVIC STONE, AND INFERIOR CALYX STONE FOLLOWING PCNL
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Abstract
Objective: To compare the stone free rates on patients with staghorn, renal pelvic, and inferior calyx stones with stone burden < 20 mm, 21-30 mm, and > 30 mm following percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in Cipto Mangunkusumo General Hospital Jakarta. Material & methods: The data were collected retrospectively from PCNL medical records in Cipto Mangunkusumo General Hospital Jakarta between January 2000 and March 2011. Six hundred and twenty-three patients with 651 kidney stones underwent PCNL. The inclusion criteria were staghorn stones, renal pelvic stone, and inferior calyx stone. All cases outside these three criteria and incomplete data were excluded. Stone free status was defined as no residual fragment on radiography or ultrasonography. Results: As many as 364 kidney stones from 344 patients were included, with 47.8% cases of staghorn stones, 31.9% cases of renal pelvic stones, and 20.3% cases of inferior calyx stones. Overall, 273 (75%) cases were defined as stone free. In group < 20 mm, 4 staghorn stones (100%), 18 renal pelvic stones (81.8%), and 34 inferior calyx stones (94.4%) were cleared (p = 0.811). In group 21-30 mm, 20 staghorn stones (95.2%), 52 renal pelvic stones (91.2%), and 26 inferior calyx stones (92.9%) were cleared (p = 1.000). In group > 30 mm, 83 staghorn stones (55.7%), 28 renal pelvic stones (75.7%), and 8 inferior calyx stones (80%) were cleared (p = 0.037). Conclusion: PCNL is an important tool for treating various kinds and sizes of kidney stones with high stone free rate.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy, staghorn stone, renal pelvic stone, inferior calyx stone, stone free rate
Williams SK, Hoenig DM. Synchronous bilateral percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol. 2009; 23(10): 1707-12.
Wong MYC. An update on percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the management of urinary stone. Curr Opin Urol. 2001; 11: 367-72.
Probst CEM, Denstedt JD, Razvi H. Preoperative indications for percutaneous nephrolithotripsy in 2009. J Endourol. 2009; 23(10): 1557-61.
Sam Z, Nasehi A, Basiri A, Simforoosh N, Danesh AK, Sharifi AF, et al. PCNL in the management of lower pole caliceal stone. Urology Journal UNRC/IUA. 2004; 1(3): 174-6.
Turk C, Knoll T, Petrik A, Sarica K, Skolarikos A, Straub M, et al. Guidelines on urolithiasis. EAU Guidelines; 2011.
Pulido ON, Aceves JG. Management of infectious complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. 2009; 23(10): 1757-62.
Matlaga BR, Kim SC, Lingeman JE. Improving outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy: access. EAU Update Series. 2005; 3: 37-43.
Preminger GM, Assimos DG, Lingeman JE, Nakada SY, Pearle MS, Wolf Jr JS. Chapter 1: AUA guideline on management of staghorn stone: diagnosis and treatment recommendations. J Urol. 2005; 173: 1991-2000.
Raman JD, Pearle MS. Management options for lower pole kidney stone. Curr Opin Urol. 2008; 18: 214-9.
Albala DM, Assimos DG, Clayman RV, Denstedt JD, Grasso M, Aceves JG, et al. Lower pole I: a prospective randomized trial of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrostolithotomy for lower pole nephrolithiasis-initial results. J Urol. 2001; 166: 2072-80.
Soucy F, Ko R, Duvdevani M, Nott L, Denstedt JD, Razvi H. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for staghorn stone: a single center’s experience over 15 years. J Endourol. 2009; 23(10): 1669-73.
Williams SK, Leveillee RJ. A single percutaneous access and flexible nephroscopy is the best treatment for a full staghorn stone. J Endourol. 2008; 22(9): 1835-7.
Bayles A, Chitale S, Irving S, Burgess N. An audit of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the United Kingdom. Br J Med Surg Urol. 2010; 187: 1-7.
Huang SW, Chang CH, Wang CJ. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the treatment of complete staghorn stones. JTUA. 2005; 16(4): 169-73.
Aron M, Yadav R, Goel R, Kolla SB, Gautam G, Hemal AK, et al. Multi-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy for large complete staghorn stone. Urol Int. 2005; 75: 327-32.
Wong C, Leveillee RJ. Single upper-pole percutaneous access for treatment of >5-cm complex branched staghorn stone: is shockwave lithotripsy necessary. J Endourol. 2002; 16(7): 477-81.
Desai M, Jain P, Ganpule A, Sabnis R, Patel S, Shrivastav P. Developments in technique and technology: the effect on the results of percutaneous nephrolithotomy for staghorn stone. BJU Int. 2009; 104: 542-8.
Netto NR, Ikonomidis J, Ikari O, Claro JA. Comparative study of percutaneous access for staghorn stone. Urology. 2005; 65(4): 659-62.
de la Rosette JJMCH, Zuazu JR, Tsakiris P, Elsakka AM, Zudaire JJ, Laguna MP, et al. Prognostic factors and percutaneous nephrolithotomy morbidity: a multivariate analysis of a contemporary series using the clavien classification. J Urol. 2008; 180: 2489-93.
Williams SK, Leveillee RJ. Management of staghorn stone: single puncture with judicious use of the flexible nephroscope. Curr Opin Urol. 2008; 18: 224-8.
Pardalidis NP, Andriopoulos NA, Sountoulidis P, Kosmaoglou EV. Should percutaneous nephrolithotripsy be considered the primary therapy for lower pole stones? J Endourol. 2010; 24(2): 219-22.
Preminger GM. Management of lower pole kidney stone: shock wave lithotripsy versus percutaneous nephrolitotomy versus flexible ureteroscopy. Urol Res. 2006; 34: 108-11.
Yuruk E, Tefekli A, Sari E, Karadag MA, Tepeler A, Binbay M, et al. Does previous extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy affect the performance and outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy? J Urol. 2009; 181: 663-7.