Stone Disease

Arun Chawla
{"title":"Stone Disease","authors":"Arun Chawla","doi":"10.1097/ju.0000000000000938","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: RIRS is useful in the management of small renal calculi (<2cm), however in developing countries PCNL provides alternative which is economical and provides stone clearance in single stage. Miniaturized PCNL are associated with lesser complications compared to standard PCNL. But concerns in the miniaturized PCNL remains about stone clearance. To address this concern, the current miniPCNL that is Super-mini PCNL (SMP) was designed for effective stone clearance with fragments removal by irrigation/suction and fragment extraction by smaller stone removal forceps and with added advantage to prevent excessive intrarenal pressure and improved visualization. There is lacunae of data comparing the results of this Super mini PCNL procedure with standard PCNL. In the present study, the primary objective is to compare the efficacy (stone-free rate) between SMP and standard PCNL. The secondary objectives are to compare the safety (blood loss, complications), operative time, length of hospital stay and post-operative pain score and analgesic requirement. METHODS: 150 patients presenting with renal calculi < 2 cm were randomized to a standard or a Super-mini PCNL group between September 2018 and April 2019. Randomization was based on centralized computer-generated numbers. In SMP, sheath is of 14-Fr size with internal working channel of 12.5 Fr and an oblique channel to which suction was attached. This oblique part consists of a pressure vent through which pressure can be adjusted by either partially or completely occluding the pressure vent with the surgeon's thumb. Irrigation into pelvi-calyceal system is through a 6 Fr ureteric catheter (with multiple holes at the proximal 5 cm) placed in the ureter. With active suction, the dust and tiny stone fragments would pass through the oblique channel into the collecting bottle of suction. The larger fragments were extracted using a 3Fr grasper. In standard PCNL, 24-28 Fr amplatz sheath and 20.8 / 26 Fr nephroscope were used to manage the calculus. Variables studied were stone free rates, operating time, intraoperative and postoperative complications (according to the ClavieneDindo classification system), postoperative pain score, analgesic requirement and hospital stay. Statistical analysis was performed using a t-test for continuous variables with normal distribution and a ManneWhitney U-test for variables without normal distribution. For categorical variables, the chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test was applied. A P value <0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance. RESULTS: Comparison of intra-operative and postoperative variables in the two study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Super-mini PCNL offers equal stone clearance rate compared to standard PCNL, however it is more safe when compared to standard PCNL in-terms of complications. Even though SMP has more operative time compared to standard PCNL, it has significantly less intra-operative and post-operative bleeding with less post-operative pain score and thereby less hospital stay and lesser Clavien Dindo complications. Source of Funding: nil","PeriodicalId":501636,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Urology","volume":"121 17","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ju.0000000000000938","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: RIRS is useful in the management of small renal calculi (<2cm), however in developing countries PCNL provides alternative which is economical and provides stone clearance in single stage. Miniaturized PCNL are associated with lesser complications compared to standard PCNL. But concerns in the miniaturized PCNL remains about stone clearance. To address this concern, the current miniPCNL that is Super-mini PCNL (SMP) was designed for effective stone clearance with fragments removal by irrigation/suction and fragment extraction by smaller stone removal forceps and with added advantage to prevent excessive intrarenal pressure and improved visualization. There is lacunae of data comparing the results of this Super mini PCNL procedure with standard PCNL. In the present study, the primary objective is to compare the efficacy (stone-free rate) between SMP and standard PCNL. The secondary objectives are to compare the safety (blood loss, complications), operative time, length of hospital stay and post-operative pain score and analgesic requirement. METHODS: 150 patients presenting with renal calculi < 2 cm were randomized to a standard or a Super-mini PCNL group between September 2018 and April 2019. Randomization was based on centralized computer-generated numbers. In SMP, sheath is of 14-Fr size with internal working channel of 12.5 Fr and an oblique channel to which suction was attached. This oblique part consists of a pressure vent through which pressure can be adjusted by either partially or completely occluding the pressure vent with the surgeon's thumb. Irrigation into pelvi-calyceal system is through a 6 Fr ureteric catheter (with multiple holes at the proximal 5 cm) placed in the ureter. With active suction, the dust and tiny stone fragments would pass through the oblique channel into the collecting bottle of suction. The larger fragments were extracted using a 3Fr grasper. In standard PCNL, 24-28 Fr amplatz sheath and 20.8 / 26 Fr nephroscope were used to manage the calculus. Variables studied were stone free rates, operating time, intraoperative and postoperative complications (according to the ClavieneDindo classification system), postoperative pain score, analgesic requirement and hospital stay. Statistical analysis was performed using a t-test for continuous variables with normal distribution and a ManneWhitney U-test for variables without normal distribution. For categorical variables, the chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test was applied. A P value <0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance. RESULTS: Comparison of intra-operative and postoperative variables in the two study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Super-mini PCNL offers equal stone clearance rate compared to standard PCNL, however it is more safe when compared to standard PCNL in-terms of complications. Even though SMP has more operative time compared to standard PCNL, it has significantly less intra-operative and post-operative bleeding with less post-operative pain score and thereby less hospital stay and lesser Clavien Dindo complications. Source of Funding: nil
结石病
简介和目的:RIRS 可用于治疗小的肾结石(小于 2 厘米),但在发展中国家,PCNL 是一种经济实惠的替代方法,可在一个阶段内清除结石。与标准 PCNL 相比,小型 PCNL 的并发症较少。但微型 PCNL 在结石清除方面仍存在问题。为了解决这一问题,目前的微型 PCNL 即超级微型 PCNL(SMP)设计用于有效清除结石,通过冲洗/抽吸清除碎石,并用较小的取石钳取出碎石,同时还具有防止肾内压力过高和改善视野的优点。目前还缺少将这种超小型 PCNL 手术与标准 PCNL 手术的结果进行比较的数据。本研究的主要目的是比较 SMP 和标准 PCNL 的疗效(无结石率)。次要目标是比较安全性(失血量、并发症)、手术时间、住院时间、术后疼痛评分和镇痛剂需求。方法:2018 年 9 月至 2019 年 4 月期间,150 名肾结石小于 2 厘米的患者被随机分配到标准 PCNL 组或超微型 PCNL 组。随机化基于中央计算机生成的数字。在 SMP 中,鞘为 14 Fr 大小,内部工作通道为 12.5 Fr,并有一个斜通道连接抽吸器。这个斜面部分包括一个压力通气孔,外科医生可以用拇指部分或完全堵住压力通气孔来调节压力。通过一根 6 Fr 输尿管导管(近端 5 厘米处有多个孔)插入输尿管,对肾盂-膀胱系统进行冲洗。在主动抽吸的情况下,灰尘和微小的结石碎片会通过斜通道进入抽吸收集瓶。较大的碎石则使用 3Fr 抓取器取出。在标准 PCNL 中,使用 24-28 Fr 放大镜鞘和 20.8/26 Fr 肾镜处理结石。研究变量包括无结石率、手术时间、术中和术后并发症(根据 ClavieneDindo 分类系统)、术后疼痛评分、镇痛剂需求和住院时间。统计分析对正态分布的连续变量采用 t 检验,对非正态分布的变量采用 ManneWhitney U 检验。对于分类变量,则采用卡方检验或费雪精确检验。P 值小于 0.05 视为统计学意义显著。结果:比较了两组研究对象的术中和术后变量。结论:超微型 PCNL超小型 PCNL 与标准 PCNL 相比,结石清除率相同,但在并发症方面,超小型 PCNL 比标准 PCNL 更安全。尽管超小型 PCNL 与标准 PCNL 相比手术时间更长,但术中和术后出血量明显更少,术后疼痛评分更低,因此住院时间更短,Clavien Dindo 并发症更少。资金来源:无
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信