Results of percutaneous nephrolithotomy using two accesses in the treatment of patients with staghorn stones


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

Introduction. In order to improve clinical efficiency and reduce the risk of postoperative complications in patients with staghorn stones, we compared the results of original technique of biportal percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) with the standard PCNL. Materials and methods. The total of 221 patients with staghorn stones of K3-K4 was included in the study. The biportal PCNL was used in 109 patients, while the control group consisted of 112 patients. Inclusion criteria were stone size ≥2 cm, age over 18 years, absence of coagulopathy and width of the renal parenchyma ≥1 cm. On 1st postoperative day, ultrasound or plain urography was performed, while in patient with radiolucent stones, multi-slice computed tomography was used. In addition, complete blood count and biochemical profile were done. The main difference from the standard PCNL with sequential renal tracts is the simultaneous creation of the main and additional accesses when performing biportal PCNL. This method allowed two surgeons to simultaneously and synergistically perform lithotripsy and stone extraction from two accesses using a standard nephroscope in the main tract of 24 Ch and a miniaturized nephroscope in the additional tract of 16.5 Ch. Results. The stone-free rate in the group of biportal PCNL was 80.7% (n=88), compared to 72.3% in the control group (n=81). Secondary interventions and additional procedures were required in 29 (26.6%) and 40 (39.2%) cases, respectively. The total number of infectious and hemorrhagic complications was higher in the control group. Discussion. According to our data, significant advantages are observed in the group of biportal PCNL compared to the standard technique. Conclusion. Biportal PCNL can be recommended as a promising advancement of the technique traditionally used in the clinical practice.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

D. S Merinov

N.A. Lopatkin Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology - branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Center

Email: d.merinov@gmail.com
Ph.D., Head of the Department of Endourology Moscow, Russia

A. V Kazachenko

N.A. Lopatkin Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology - branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Center

Email: avknii@mail.ru
Ph.D., MD, deputy director of clinical work Moscow, Russia

A. V Artemov

N.A. Lopatkin Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology - branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Center

Email: artie@mail.ru
Ph.D., Head ofthe operating theatre with sterilization Moscow, Russia

L. D Arustamov

N.A. Lopatkin Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology - branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Center

Email: endourology@mail.ru
physician at the Department of Extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy Moscow, Russia

S. S Gurbanov

N.A. Lopatkin Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology - branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Center

Email: gurbanovsh@gmail.com
Ph.D., leading researcher at the Department of Endourology Moscow, Russia

O. V Konstantinova

N.A. Lopatkin Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology - branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Center

Email: konstant-ov@yandex.ru
Ph.D., Chief Researcher of the Department of Urolithiasis Moscow, Russia

K. K Shamkhalova

N.A. Lopatkin Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology - branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Center

Email: kamila.shch@mail.ru
Ph.D. student Moscow, Russia

References

  1. Assimos D., Krambeck A., Miller N.L., et al. Surgical management of stones: American Urological Association Endourological Society Guideline, part I. J. Urol. 2016;196(4):1153-1160.
  2. Türk С., Petrik А., Sarica К., et al. EAU Guidelines on Interventional Treatment for Urolithiasis. Eur. Urol., 2016:69(3):475-482.
  3. Меринов Д.С., Артемов А.В., Епишов В.А., Арустамов Л.Д., Гурбанов Ш.Ш., Фатихов Р.Р. Перкутанная нефролитотомия в лечении коралловидных камней почек К3-К4. Экспериментальная и клиническая урология. 2016;3:57-62.
  4. Меринов Д.С., Павлов Д.А., Гурбанов Ш.Ш., Фатихов Р.Р., Епишов В.А., Артемов А.В., Швангирадзе И.А. Наш 5-летний опыт выполнения перкутанной нефролитотомии у пациентов с крупными и коралловидными камнями почек. Экспериментальная и клиническая урология. 2014;2:54-59.
  5. Епишов В.А., Меринов Д.С., Чернышев И.В., Фатихов Р.Р., Павлов Д.А., Артемов А.В. Сравнительная оценка эффективности эндоскопических методов лечения больных с крупными и коралловидными камнями почек 1-й и 2-й стадий. Медицинский вестник Башкортостана. 2013;8:2:53-55.
  6. Чернышев И.В., Меринов Д.С., Епишов В.А., Павлов Д.А., Фатихов Р.Р. Возможности ретроградной интраренальной хирургии в лечении крупных и коралловидных камней почек. Экспериментальная и клиническая урология. 2012;4:67-73.
  7. Меринов Д.С., Павлов Д.А, Фатихов Р.Р., Епишов В.А., Гурбанов Ш.Ш., Артемов А.В. Минимально-инвазивная перкутанная нефролитотрипсия: деликатный и эффективный инструмент в лечении крупных камней почек. Эксперементальна и клиническая урология. 2013;3:94-98.
  8. Emre Sener T., Cloutier J., Villa L. et al. Can we provide low intrarenal pressures with good irrigation flow by decreasing the size of ureteral access sheaths? J. Endourol. 2016;30(1):49-55.
  9. Tailly T. et al. Innovations in percutaneous nephrolithotomy.Int. J. Surg. 2016; 36(Pt D):665-672.
  10. Wang Y., Hou Y., Jiang F., et al. Standard-tract combined with mini-tract in percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal staghorn calculi. Urol.Int. 2014;92(4):422-426.
  11. Zhu W. et al. Minimally invasive versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis. Urolithiasis. 2015;43(6);563-570.
  12. Proietti S., Giusti G., Desai M., Ganpule A.P. A critical review of miniaturised percutaneous nephrolithotomy: is smaller better? Eur. Urol. Focus. 2017;3(1):56-61.
  13. Rivera M., Viers B., Cockerill P., Agarwal D., Mehta R., Krambeck A. Pre-and postoperative predictors of infection-related complications in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J. Endourol. 2016; 30(9):982- 986.
  14. Меринов Д.С. Оптимизация эндоскопических методов лечения крупных и коралловидных камней почек, дисс. д-ра. мед. наук: 14.01.2023 защищена 17.03.2020. М., 2019. 247 с.
  15. Меринов Д.С., Гурбанов Ш.Ш., Артемов А.В. и др. Патент РФ № 2689853/29.05.2019. Способ хирургического малоинвазивного лечения нефролитиаза у взрослых. Патент России № 2689853. 2019. Бюл. № 16.
  16. Zhao Z., Cui Z., Zeng T., Wan S.P., Zeng G.Comparison of 1-stage with 2-stage Multiple-tracts Mini-percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for the Treatment of Staghorn Stones: A Matched Cohorts Analysis. Urology. 2016; 87:46-51.
  17. Sugihara T. et al. Longer operative time is associated with higherrisk of severe complications after percutaneousnephrolithotomy: Analysis of 1511 cases from a Japanese nationwide database. Fujimura.International Journal of Urology, 2013;20:1193-1198.
  18. Labate G. et al. The percutaneous nephrolithotomy global study: classification of complication. Endourol. 2011;25(8):1275-1279.
  19. Kaya E., Ebiloğlu T., Zor M., Yalçın S., Coğuplugil A.E. The outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy on ≥50 mm staghorn and multiple calicial stones. Turk J Urol 2018;44(2):148-152.
  20. Desai M. et al. The clinical research office of the endourological society percutaneous nephrolithotomy global study: staghorn versus nonstaghorn stones. J. Endourol. 2011;25(8):1263-1268.
  21. Hamamoto S. et al. Efficacy of endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in the prone split-leg position for staghorn calculi. J. Endourol. 2015; 29(1):19-24.
  22. Малхасян В.А., Семенякин И.В., Иванов В.Ю., Сухих С.О., Гаджиев Н.К. Обзор осложнений перкутанной нефролитотомии и методов их лечения. Урология. 2018;4:47-153.
  23. Мартов А.Г. Рентген-эндоскопические методы диагностики и лечения заболеваний почек и верхних мочевых путей (суправезикальная эндоурология): дисс. док. мед. наук: 14.01.23. М., 1993. 60.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies