Published 2014-07-03
Pande Made Wisnu Tirtayasa Ponco Birowo Nur Rasyid


Objectives: To compare the stone free rates of inferior calyceal stones with stone burden < 20 mm, 21-30 mm, and > 30 mm on post-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) patients in Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital. Material & method: The data was collected retrospectively from PCNL medical records in Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital between January 2000 until May 2012. Patients were followed-up with plain abdominal radiography (BNO) or renal ultrasonography (USG). Stone free status was defined as no residual fragments on radiography or USG. Results: As many as 88 patients with inferior calyceal stones who underwent PCNL were included. Forty-three cases had stone burden < 20 mm, 34 cases with stone burden 21-30 mm, and 11 cases with stone burden > 30 mm. Overall, 81 (92%) cases were defined as stone free. On group < 20 mm, 21-30 mm, and > 30 mm; 41 (95%), 32 (94%), and 8 (73%) cases defined as stone free respectively (p = 0.485). Conclusion: PCNL is the primary modalityon the management of calyx inferior stones with high stone free rate. The stone free rate of these three groups showed no statistically significant difference.Keywords: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy, inferior calyx stone, stone free rate.



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.

Sumino Y, Mimata H, Tasaki Y, Ohno H, Hoshino T. Predictors of lower pole renal stone clearance after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol. 2002; 168: 1344-7.

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.

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, Straub M, Seitz C. Guidelines on urolithiasis. EAU Guidelines; 2012.

Sampaio FJ, Aragao A. Inferior pole collecting system anatomy: Its probable role in extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. J Urol. 1992; 147: 322-4.

Elbahnasy, Clayman RV, Shalhav AL. Lower caliceal stone clearance after shockwave lithotripsy or ureteroscopy: The impact of lower pole radiographic anatomy. J Urol. 1998; 159: 676-82.

Elbahnasy, Clayman RV, Shalhav AL. Lower-pole caliceal stone clearance after shockwave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and flexible ureteroscopy: Impact of spatial anatomy. J Endourol. 1998; 12: 113-9.

Preminger GM. Management of lower pole kidney stone: Shock wave lithotripsy versus percutaneous nephrolitotomy versus flexible ureteroscopy. Urol Res. 2006; 34: 108-11.

Copyright Information
Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine/Airlangga University