A prospective comparative study to evaluate safety and efficacy of pneumatic versus laser lithotripsy in mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

IF 1.5 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY American journal of clinical and experimental urology Pub Date : 2023-01-01
Ashish Sharma, Anant Giri, Gaurav Garg, Nripesh Sadasukhi, T C Sadasukhi, Hotilal Gupta, Manish Gupta, Sonia Goswami, Ankit Modi
{"title":"A prospective comparative study to evaluate safety and efficacy of pneumatic versus laser lithotripsy in mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy.","authors":"Ashish Sharma,&nbsp;Anant Giri,&nbsp;Gaurav Garg,&nbsp;Nripesh Sadasukhi,&nbsp;T C Sadasukhi,&nbsp;Hotilal Gupta,&nbsp;Manish Gupta,&nbsp;Sonia Goswami,&nbsp;Ankit Modi","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The choice of lithotripter is an important part of planning in mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini perc) as the operating time is prolonged due to reduced sheath size and smaller working channel. Previous studies mostly reported the use of laser lithotripter for stone fragmentation while the literature on pneumatic lithotripter use in miniperc is scant.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this study, we compared the efficacy and safety of the laser lithotripter (LL) vs pneumatic lithotripter (PL) in miniperc for small to medium-sized renal/upper ureteric stones (size: 1-2 cm). All consecutive patients who underwent miniperc from September 2020 to August 2022 were included in the study. Laser lithotripter was used in 81 patients (group LL), while pneumatic was used in 75 patients (group PL). The preoperative, operative, and postoperative findings were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Baseline patient characteristics (age, sex, body mass index, and co-morbid illness) and stone characteristics (size, stone number, laterality, presence of staghorn calculi, presence of hydronephrosis, Guy's stone scores) were comparable between the two groups (P>0.05). The mean operative time was comparable (P=0.38) while the mean fragmentation time was significantly higher in the PL group (35.42±6.34 vs 28.96±2.82 minutes; P<0.01). 29.3% required forceps/basket for stone removal in PL group as compared to 7.4% in LL group (P=0.02). Mean VAS (Visual Analog Scale) score on the first post-operative day, stone clearance, drop in hemoglobin, average hospital stay, stone clearance at 3 months postoperative, and complications were comparable (P>0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Lithotripsy with pneumatic lithotripter can be used as an equally effective and safe alternative to laser lithotripter in mini-perc for treatment of small-medium sized renal/upper ureteric calculi.</p>","PeriodicalId":7438,"journal":{"name":"American journal of clinical and experimental urology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10333137/pdf/ajceu0011-0258.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of clinical and experimental urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The choice of lithotripter is an important part of planning in mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini perc) as the operating time is prolonged due to reduced sheath size and smaller working channel. Previous studies mostly reported the use of laser lithotripter for stone fragmentation while the literature on pneumatic lithotripter use in miniperc is scant.

Methods: In this study, we compared the efficacy and safety of the laser lithotripter (LL) vs pneumatic lithotripter (PL) in miniperc for small to medium-sized renal/upper ureteric stones (size: 1-2 cm). All consecutive patients who underwent miniperc from September 2020 to August 2022 were included in the study. Laser lithotripter was used in 81 patients (group LL), while pneumatic was used in 75 patients (group PL). The preoperative, operative, and postoperative findings were compared.

Results: Baseline patient characteristics (age, sex, body mass index, and co-morbid illness) and stone characteristics (size, stone number, laterality, presence of staghorn calculi, presence of hydronephrosis, Guy's stone scores) were comparable between the two groups (P>0.05). The mean operative time was comparable (P=0.38) while the mean fragmentation time was significantly higher in the PL group (35.42±6.34 vs 28.96±2.82 minutes; P<0.01). 29.3% required forceps/basket for stone removal in PL group as compared to 7.4% in LL group (P=0.02). Mean VAS (Visual Analog Scale) score on the first post-operative day, stone clearance, drop in hemoglobin, average hospital stay, stone clearance at 3 months postoperative, and complications were comparable (P>0.05).

Conclusion: Lithotripsy with pneumatic lithotripter can be used as an equally effective and safe alternative to laser lithotripter in mini-perc for treatment of small-medium sized renal/upper ureteric calculi.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
微创经皮肾镜取石术中气压与激光碎石的安全性和有效性的前瞻性比较研究。
目的:微创经皮肾镜取石术(mini perc)中,由于鞘层尺寸减小,工作通道减小,延长了手术时间,碎石机的选择是手术计划的重要组成部分。以往的研究大多报道了激光碎石机用于石料破碎,而气动碎石机用于小型石料破碎的文献很少。方法:在本研究中,我们比较了激光碎石机(LL)与气动碎石机(PL)在小到中型肾/输尿管上段结石(尺寸:1-2 cm)治疗中的疗效和安全性。所有从2020年9月至2022年8月连续接受miniperc治疗的患者都被纳入研究。激光碎石机81例(LL组),气动碎石机75例(PL组)。比较术前、手术和术后的结果。结果:两组患者的基线特征(年龄、性别、体重指数和合并症)和结石特征(大小、结石数量、侧边性、有无鹿角型结石、有无肾积水、盖伊结石评分)具有可比性(P>0.05)。平均手术时间比较(P=0.38),而PL组的平均碎裂时间明显高于前者(35.42±6.34 vs 28.96±2.82);P0.05)。结论:气动碎石机在微创肾/输尿管上段结石治疗中可与激光碎石机同等安全有效。
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
自引率
8.30%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A case series of emphysematous pyelonephritis in COVID-positive patients. Artificial intelligence in pathologic diagnosis, prognosis and prediction of prostate cancer. Identification of ECM and EMT relevant genes involved in the progression of bladder cancer through bioinformatics analysis. Long time follow-up for patients with testicular torsion: new findings. Prognostic significance of the PI-RADS score in men with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy.
×
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