Ultrasonographic percutaneous nephrolithotomy, with or without ureteral catheter

IF 0.2 Q4 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Journal of Renal Injury Prevention Pub Date : 2021-05-20 DOI:10.34172/jrip.2022.07
Telma Zahirian Moghadam, Hamed Mohseni Rad, A. Hossein Khani, A. Ghazi
{"title":"Ultrasonographic percutaneous nephrolithotomy, with or without ureteral catheter","authors":"Telma Zahirian Moghadam, Hamed Mohseni Rad, A. Hossein Khani, A. Ghazi","doi":"10.34172/jrip.2022.07","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Introduction: Access by ultrasonography rather than fluoroscopy in addition to reducing radiation exposure to the patient and staff, is safe and effective. Access by ultrasonography is bi-planar and real-time compared to fluoroscopy, because it provides fewer side effects and more stone free rate. Objectives: To study the complications and outcome of PCNL (percutaneous nephrolithotomy) with or without using ureteral catheter. Patients and Methods: We studied 59 patients with at least 2 cm diameter of renal stone from January to December of 2018. After general anesthesia, 35 patients in the ureteral stent group were prepared in bladder lithotomy position. Then 5-French (Fr) ureteral catheters were introduced endoscopically in stone affected side and fixed to 16 Fr urethral Foley catheters in the patients. Other 24 patients in the non-stent group following anesthesia were directed to prone position instantly. In all of the patients, ultrasonography was performed in posterior auxiliary line below the ribs in prone position. Retrograde instillation of normal saline was performed through ureteral catheter in stent-group. Then we inserted 18G Chiba needle to desired calyx without needle holder guidance in all patients. Our approach according to probe was transverse. Results: Our patients comprised of 24 men and 35 women aged 24 to 66 years. Thirteen of them had no hydronephrosis and their stone sizes ranged from 21 mm to 65 mm. Patients in the ureteral stent group were more obese compared to the non-stent group (P=0.02) in addition to significantly more operation time (P=0.03). However hydronephrosis was not significantly different between groups (P=0.3). Postoperative residual stone rate, hospital stay days and complications (Fever, blood transfusion) were the same between both groups. Only urinary leak was more common in the non-stent group (P=0.04) Conclusion: Ultra-sonographic-PCNL without inserting ureteral catheter before surgery is conceivable especially in patients with lower body mass index (BMI). Advantages and complications are same in ureteral stent and non-stent patients except urinary leak that is more common in non-stent patients.","PeriodicalId":16950,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Renal Injury Prevention","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Renal Injury Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/jrip.2022.07","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Access by ultrasonography rather than fluoroscopy in addition to reducing radiation exposure to the patient and staff, is safe and effective. Access by ultrasonography is bi-planar and real-time compared to fluoroscopy, because it provides fewer side effects and more stone free rate. Objectives: To study the complications and outcome of PCNL (percutaneous nephrolithotomy) with or without using ureteral catheter. Patients and Methods: We studied 59 patients with at least 2 cm diameter of renal stone from January to December of 2018. After general anesthesia, 35 patients in the ureteral stent group were prepared in bladder lithotomy position. Then 5-French (Fr) ureteral catheters were introduced endoscopically in stone affected side and fixed to 16 Fr urethral Foley catheters in the patients. Other 24 patients in the non-stent group following anesthesia were directed to prone position instantly. In all of the patients, ultrasonography was performed in posterior auxiliary line below the ribs in prone position. Retrograde instillation of normal saline was performed through ureteral catheter in stent-group. Then we inserted 18G Chiba needle to desired calyx without needle holder guidance in all patients. Our approach according to probe was transverse. Results: Our patients comprised of 24 men and 35 women aged 24 to 66 years. Thirteen of them had no hydronephrosis and their stone sizes ranged from 21 mm to 65 mm. Patients in the ureteral stent group were more obese compared to the non-stent group (P=0.02) in addition to significantly more operation time (P=0.03). However hydronephrosis was not significantly different between groups (P=0.3). Postoperative residual stone rate, hospital stay days and complications (Fever, blood transfusion) were the same between both groups. Only urinary leak was more common in the non-stent group (P=0.04) Conclusion: Ultra-sonographic-PCNL without inserting ureteral catheter before surgery is conceivable especially in patients with lower body mass index (BMI). Advantages and complications are same in ureteral stent and non-stent patients except urinary leak that is more common in non-stent patients.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
超声经皮肾镜取石术,输尿管置管或不置管
简介:除了减少患者和工作人员的辐射暴露外,通过超声波检查而不是荧光镜检查是安全有效的。与荧光镜检查相比,超声检查是双平面和实时的,因为它提供了更少的副作用和更多的结石清除率。目的:探讨经皮肾镜取石术(PCNL)在使用或不使用输尿管导管的情况下的并发症和疗效。患者和方法:我们研究了2018年1月至12月59例肾结石直径至少2cm的患者。全麻后,输尿管支架组35例患者在膀胱取石位置进行准备。然后将5-French(Fr)输尿管导管插入结石受累侧,并固定在患者的16Fr尿道Foley导管上。其他24名非支架组患者在麻醉后立即俯卧。所有患者均采用俯卧位肋骨下方后辅助线进行超声检查。支架组经输尿管导管逆行灌注生理盐水。然后,我们在所有患者中在没有针座引导的情况下将18G千叶针插入所需的肾盏。根据探测,我们的方法是横向的。结果:我们的患者包括24名男性和35名女性,年龄在24-66岁之间。其中13人没有肾积水,结石大小在21mm至65mm之间。输尿管支架组的患者与非支架组相比更肥胖(P=0.02),手术时间明显更长(P=0.03)。然而,两组之间的肾积水没有显著差异(P=0.03,两组患者的住院天数和并发症(发热、输血)相同。只有尿路渗漏在无支架组中更常见(P=0.04)结论:术前未插入输尿管导管的超声检查PCNL是可行的,尤其是在体重指数较低的患者中。输尿管支架和非支架患者的优点和并发症是相同的,除了尿路渗漏在非支架患者中更常见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Renal Injury Prevention
Journal of Renal Injury Prevention UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: The Journal of Renal Injury Prevention (JRIP) is a quarterly peer-reviewed international journal devoted to the promotion of early diagnosis and prevention of renal diseases. It publishes in March, June, September and December of each year. It has pursued this aim through publishing editorials, original research articles, reviews, mini-reviews, commentaries, letters to the editor, hypothesis, case reports, epidemiology and prevention, news and views and renal biopsy teaching point. In this journal, particular emphasis is given to research, both experimental and clinical, aimed at protection/prevention of renal failure and modalities in the treatment of diabetic nephropathy. A further aim of this journal is to emphasize and strengthen the link between renal pathologists/nephropathologists and nephrologists. In addition, JRIP welcomes basic biomedical as well as pharmaceutical scientific research applied to clinical nephrology. Futuristic conceptual hypothesis that integrate various fields of acute kidney injury and renal tubular cell protection are encouraged to be submitted.
期刊最新文献
Relationship between the level of uric acid and peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis patients; a retrospective cohort study Contrast-associated acute kidney injury following intravenous contrast media computed tomography; new concept and future directions: A systematic review study on emergencies patients Comparing the effectiveness of hyperimmune plasma and plasmapheresis in COVID-19 patients Cancer-associated thrombotic microangiopathy; a review article The correlation between serum fibroblast growth factor-23 levels and left ventricular hypertrophy in chronic kidney disease patients
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1