Krishnendu Maiti, Kani Dayal Khare, Dilip Kumar Pal
{"title":"经皮肾镜取石手术治疗复杂肾结石患者的仰卧位与俯卧位对比。","authors":"Krishnendu Maiti, Kani Dayal Khare, Dilip Kumar Pal","doi":"10.1177/03915603241229801","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Compare the surgical outcomes, safety, stone free rate, hospital stay, and complication of prone and supine PCNL in case of complex renal stone.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This is an observational study conducted in our institute, it consist of 120 patients over the period of 2 years from July 2021 to June 2023, all the patients were divided into two groups: 60 patients underwent modified supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and remaining 60 patients underwent standard prone PCNL. The measured data included operative time, number of punctures, blood loss, stone-free rate, length of hospital stays, and rate of complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The two groups were comparable in mean age, male to female ratio, number of punctures, number of tract, size of tract, residual calculi in follow up period, blood transfusion, re-do surgery, chest complication, hospital stay, and postoperative fever and pain. The mean operating time was 1.59 h in supine PCNL and 2.49 h in prone PCNL. The <i>p</i> value was significant (<i>p</i> = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>By this study we observed that the supine PCNL is associated with statistically significant reduced operating time as compared to conventional prone PCNL with advantages of not putting the patient in prone position. The postoperative complications such as pain and fever were not significant when compared in both groups. We conclude our study and found that, the supine PCNL is an equally effective in treating complex renal stone as compared to prone PCNL.</p>","PeriodicalId":23574,"journal":{"name":"Urologia Journal","volume":" ","pages":"558-562"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Supine versus prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of patient with complex renal stone diseases.\",\"authors\":\"Krishnendu Maiti, Kani Dayal Khare, Dilip Kumar Pal\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/03915603241229801\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Compare the surgical outcomes, safety, stone free rate, hospital stay, and complication of prone and supine PCNL in case of complex renal stone.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This is an observational study conducted in our institute, it consist of 120 patients over the period of 2 years from July 2021 to June 2023, all the patients were divided into two groups: 60 patients underwent modified supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and remaining 60 patients underwent standard prone PCNL. The measured data included operative time, number of punctures, blood loss, stone-free rate, length of hospital stays, and rate of complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The two groups were comparable in mean age, male to female ratio, number of punctures, number of tract, size of tract, residual calculi in follow up period, blood transfusion, re-do surgery, chest complication, hospital stay, and postoperative fever and pain. The mean operating time was 1.59 h in supine PCNL and 2.49 h in prone PCNL. The <i>p</i> value was significant (<i>p</i> = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>By this study we observed that the supine PCNL is associated with statistically significant reduced operating time as compared to conventional prone PCNL with advantages of not putting the patient in prone position. The postoperative complications such as pain and fever were not significant when compared in both groups. We conclude our study and found that, the supine PCNL is an equally effective in treating complex renal stone as compared to prone PCNL.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23574,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Urologia Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"558-562\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Urologia Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/03915603241229801\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urologia Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03915603241229801","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Supine versus prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of patient with complex renal stone diseases.
Objectives: Compare the surgical outcomes, safety, stone free rate, hospital stay, and complication of prone and supine PCNL in case of complex renal stone.
Materials and methods: This is an observational study conducted in our institute, it consist of 120 patients over the period of 2 years from July 2021 to June 2023, all the patients were divided into two groups: 60 patients underwent modified supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and remaining 60 patients underwent standard prone PCNL. The measured data included operative time, number of punctures, blood loss, stone-free rate, length of hospital stays, and rate of complications.
Results: The two groups were comparable in mean age, male to female ratio, number of punctures, number of tract, size of tract, residual calculi in follow up period, blood transfusion, re-do surgery, chest complication, hospital stay, and postoperative fever and pain. The mean operating time was 1.59 h in supine PCNL and 2.49 h in prone PCNL. The p value was significant (p = 0.001).
Conclusions: By this study we observed that the supine PCNL is associated with statistically significant reduced operating time as compared to conventional prone PCNL with advantages of not putting the patient in prone position. The postoperative complications such as pain and fever were not significant when compared in both groups. We conclude our study and found that, the supine PCNL is an equally effective in treating complex renal stone as compared to prone PCNL.