Outcomes of second-look percutaneous nephrolithotomy in renal calculi-a single centre experience

Comparative analysis of re-entry malecot and nelaton catheters after standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy in adult patients: a cross-sectional study

Drainage catheters are used almost routinely to provide urinary drainage, prevent extravasation of urine, and create tamponade against bleeding after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL). In the literature, there is no standardized approach to determining which type of catheter is superior. In this context, we aimed to comparatively analyze two different types of catheters (re-entry malecot catheter and nelaton catheter) in terms of success and complications, which we use for drainage after a PNL operation and which have very different costs. Patients who underwent PNL for kidney stones between January 2018 and October 2022 were included in the study. The data of a total of 148 patients who had a 16-F reentry malecot nephrostomy catheter or a 16-F nelaton catheter were analyzed. In addition to the demographic characteristics of the patients, stone characteristics, operative data, hospitalization time, analgesia requirement, hemoglobin exchange, amount of blood transfusion, and postoperative data (success and complications) were comparatively evaluated. The current unit price for a reentry malecot and a nelaton catheter is 4.7 United States dollars (USD) and 0.11 USD, respectively. There were a total of 148 patients in the study, 63 of whom were nelaton catheters and 85 were reentry malecots, and the mean age was 39.95 ± 13.28 years. There was no statistically significant difference between preoperative stone sizes and residual stone rates according to the groups. In addition, there was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of access site and stone localization. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of complication rates according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, Hb levels, blood transfusion rates, operation times, or hospitalization times. In conclusion, if a second procedure is planned, a reentry malecot catheter may be preferred. Apart from this situation, nelaton catheters should be preferred because they are similar to reentry catheters in terms of effectiveness, and side effects and are more economical than reentry catheters in terms of cost.

Comparison of mini endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery and multitract minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy specifically for kidney staghorn stones: a single-centre experience

BACKGROUND

Staghorn stones require surgical treatment to prevent serious complications. Multitract percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) causes great renal parenchymal injury and blood loss. One-stage endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery (ECIRS) entails the combined use of antegrade nephroscope and retrograde flexible ureteroscope to clear the staghorn stone, which may overcome the limitations of multitract PNL. We aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes of mini ECIRS and multitract minimally invasive PNL in staghorn stone management.

METHODS

This was a retrospective single-center study of patients with staghorn stones who underwent ECIRS (n = 17) or multitract minimally invasive PNL (n = 17) between January 2018 and September 2021.

RESULTS

There was a significant between-group difference with respect to Guy's stone score. Stone size, stone burden (ECIRS group, 21.41 cm3; multitract minimally invasive PNL group, 20.88 cm3 [P = 0.94]), and degree of hydronephrosis were comparable in the two groups. There was no significant between-group difference with respect to one-step or final stone-free rates. The mean operative time was also not significantly different between the groups (ECIRS group, 140 min; multitract minimally invasive PNL group, 183 min [P = 0.63]). ECIRS was associated with significantly lesser postoperative pain (visual analog scale; ECIRS group: 0; multitract minimally invasive PNL group: 2.7 [P < 0.001]). Hemoglobin loss, postoperative blood transfusion rate, complications, and length of hospital stay were comparable in the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Both mini ECIRS and multitract minimally invasive PNL were effective and safe for the management of renal staghorn stones with comparable operation time and stone-free rate, and complications. ECIRS was associated with less severe postoperative pain.

A novel spherical-headed fascial dilator is feasible for second-stage ultrasound guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A pilot study

Objective

In second-stage percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), because the hydronephrosis has been decompressed, the dilated renal pelvis has resolved and the space is small. Consequently, introduction of the tip of the Amplatz dilator can cause injury to the opposite side of the renal-pelvic mucosa. In this study, we report the experimental and initial clinical performance of a spherical-headed fascial dilator developed specifically for second-stage PCNL.

Methods

The novel spherical-headed dilator was compared with existing tapered-headed dilators in configuration and in puncture resistance utilizing a static puncture test. Subsequently, a pilot clinical study was conducted during which patients scheduled to undergo second-stage PCNL from June 2019 to October 2019 in our center were enrolled. A typical ultrasound guided PCNL procedure was performed with the exception that the new spherical-headed fascial dilator was substituted for a tapered-headed one.

Results

Experimentally, stab resistance against polyethylene film was significantly increased using the novel spherical-headed dilator compared to the traditional tapered-headed dilators (p<0.005). In the clinical study, the novel dilators were successfully introduced into the renal pelvis and passed down the collecting system in all eight second-stage PCNL cases. There were no cases of renal pelvic perforation or brisk hemorrhage nor need for transfusion.

Conclusion

The design of the novel spherical-headed fascial dilator avoided the concentration of pressure at the tapered tip of the current Amplatz dilator by increasing the contact area and uniformly distributing and diffusing the pressure. Therefore, it is feasible to use the spherical-headed fascial dilator for second-stage PCNL.

Counter-Irrigation as a Novel Technique versus the Standard Technique in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Prospective Randomized Trial

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of our counter-irrigation technique versus the standard technique in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) by assessment of the stone-free rate after the procedures and its safety in terms of comparing the intraoperative time, Hb deficit, blood transfusion, length of hospital stay, auxiliary procedures, and perioperative complications with that of the standard one.

METHODS

This prospective randomized trial was conducted on patients with renal stone 2-3 cm in diameter without contraindications to PCNL. The patients were randomized into group A in which the counter-irrigation technique has been performed and group B who were managed by the standard technique. The preoperative characteristics including demographic data and stone parameters were compared between both groups. The primary outcome was the stone-free rate assessed by noncontrast spiral CT after 3 months. The secondary outcome included intraoperative time, Hb deficit, blood transfusion, hospital stay, auxiliary procedure required, and rate of complications.

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients were included in this study. Overall, no significant difference was observed between both groups regarding preoperative characteristics, Hb deficit, and complication rate. Operative time was significantly shorter in group B (p = 0.001). None of our patients required blood transfusion. The stone-free rates at 3 months were significantly better in group A (95% for group A and 70% for group B, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that our counter-irrigation technique has lower stone migration with subsequent significantly better stone-free rate versus the standard technique. We can recommend this technique as a potentially valid option for cases with large stone burden when the access to the upper calyx is feasible to minimize significant residual fragments.

Percutaneous nephrostomy versus retrograde ureteral stent for acute upper urinary tract obstruction with urosepsis

PURPOSE

We aimed to compare the efficacy of percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) versus retrograde ureteric stent (RUS) for acute upper urinary tract obstruction with urosepsis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a random study, comparing PCN to RUS, for the treatment of patients requiring emergency drainage due to acute upper urinary tract obstruction with urosepsis between January 2019 to March 2020. Data collected included patient characteristics, stone material, microbiological characteristics, and laboratory data. Statistical analysis was performed by the student's t-test or Mann-Whitney U test or chi-squared test and Fisher exact test.

RESULTS

At first, a total of 75 patients were eligibly assessed for enrollment. Among them, 3 cases were excluded for declining to participate and 7 cases were failed treated with RUS. At last, 35 PCN (53.85%) and 30 RUS (46.15%) patients were analyzed. There were 24 (36.92%) men and 41 (63.08%) women. The median age was 65 years. Emergency decompression was achieved by PCN in 35 (53.85%) patients and by RUS in 30 (46.15%). Urine culture was positive in 32 (49.23%) patients, of which 17 (53.13%) had E. coli. Postoperative C-reactive protein value and normal temperature recovery time in the PCN group were significantly lower than in the RUS group(P < .05).

CONCLUSION

PCN had a better outcome than RUS in emergency drainage with urosepsis, especially for patients with severe inflammation and fever.