A 1.9 mm Trilogy lithotripter in mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy Description of technique and case outcomes.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Rebecca Kindler, Arsha Venkat, Natalia L Arias-Villela, William Meeks, Emily Galen, Joel E Abbott, Meagan M Dunne, Julio G Davalos, Daniel C Rosen
{"title":"A 1.9 mm Trilogy lithotripter in mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy Description of technique and case outcomes.","authors":"Rebecca Kindler, Arsha Venkat, Natalia L Arias-Villela, William Meeks, Emily Galen, Joel E Abbott, Meagan M Dunne, Julio G Davalos, Daniel C Rosen","doi":"10.5489/cuaj.8714","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>We aimed to evaluate the novel use of a 1.9 mm Trilogy lithotripter probe with varying locations and composition of renal stones.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We prospectively enrolled patients to undergo mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) procedures using the 1.9 mm (instead of the standard 1.5 mm) Trilogy probe from August 2021 to April 2022. Several adjunctive irrigation measures compensated for reduced flow with the larger probe. The primary outcome was treatment efficiency. Patient demographics, preoperative demographics, and comorbidities, as well as real-time surgical data were extracted. Statistical analysis was performed using Kruskal-Wallis tests to compare stone type and location.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 110 patients were included in this study. The median total treatment time was 6.8 minutes, median lithotripsy time was 3.3 minutes, median stone treatment efficiency was 0.34 mm/min, and treatment efficacy was 50.4 (lithotripter time/treatment time). Overall median lithotripter efficiency was 104.6 mm<sup>3</sup>/min. Treatment efficiency was similar among stone composition (p=0.245) and location (p=0.263). Lithotripter 3D and 1D efficiency was also similar among stone composition (p=0.637 and p=0.766, respectively). Lithotripter 1D efficiency was nearly twice as fast in the lower pole compared to other stone locations (p=0.010). The overall broken probe rate for this procedure was 12%, mostly at the beginning, suggesting a learning curve. Five patients had minor complications, including one patient who required admission to the hospital for postoperative pain management.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The 1.9 mm Trilogy lithotripter can be effective in mPCNL procedures with the use of easily implementable adjunctive irrigation techniques, decreasing the gap between lithotripsy time and total treatment time.</p>","PeriodicalId":50613,"journal":{"name":"Cuaj-Canadian Urological Association Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11534393/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cuaj-Canadian Urological Association Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.8714","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: We aimed to evaluate the novel use of a 1.9 mm Trilogy lithotripter probe with varying locations and composition of renal stones.

Methods: We prospectively enrolled patients to undergo mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) procedures using the 1.9 mm (instead of the standard 1.5 mm) Trilogy probe from August 2021 to April 2022. Several adjunctive irrigation measures compensated for reduced flow with the larger probe. The primary outcome was treatment efficiency. Patient demographics, preoperative demographics, and comorbidities, as well as real-time surgical data were extracted. Statistical analysis was performed using Kruskal-Wallis tests to compare stone type and location.

Results: A total of 110 patients were included in this study. The median total treatment time was 6.8 minutes, median lithotripsy time was 3.3 minutes, median stone treatment efficiency was 0.34 mm/min, and treatment efficacy was 50.4 (lithotripter time/treatment time). Overall median lithotripter efficiency was 104.6 mm3/min. Treatment efficiency was similar among stone composition (p=0.245) and location (p=0.263). Lithotripter 3D and 1D efficiency was also similar among stone composition (p=0.637 and p=0.766, respectively). Lithotripter 1D efficiency was nearly twice as fast in the lower pole compared to other stone locations (p=0.010). The overall broken probe rate for this procedure was 12%, mostly at the beginning, suggesting a learning curve. Five patients had minor complications, including one patient who required admission to the hospital for postoperative pain management.

Conclusions: The 1.9 mm Trilogy lithotripter can be effective in mPCNL procedures with the use of easily implementable adjunctive irrigation techniques, decreasing the gap between lithotripsy time and total treatment time.

在微型经皮肾镜碎石术中引入 1.9 毫米 Trilogy 碎石器:技术说明和病例结果。
简介我们的目的是评估1.9毫米Trilogy碎石机探头在不同位置和不同成分肾结石中的新用途:我们前瞻性地招募了2021年8月至2022年4月期间使用1.9毫米(而非标准的1.5毫米)Trilogy探头进行迷你经皮肾镜碎石术(mPCNL)的患者。几种辅助灌洗措施弥补了较大探头流量减少的问题。主要结果是治疗效率。提取了患者的人口统计学特征、术前人口统计学特征、合并症以及实时手术数据。统计分析采用 Kruskal-Wallis 检验来比较结石类型和位置:本研究共纳入 110 名患者。总治疗时间中位数为 6.8 分钟,碎石时间中位数为 3.3 分钟,结石治疗效率中位数为 0.34 毫米/分钟,治疗有效率为 50.4(碎石时间/治疗时间)。碎石效率中位数为 104.6 立方毫米/分钟。不同结石成分(P=0.245)和不同位置(P=0.263)的治疗效率相似。不同结石成分的三维和一维碎石效率也相似(p=0.637 和 p=0.766)。与其他结石位置相比,下极的碎石机1D效率几乎快了一倍(p=0.010)。该手术的探头破损率总体为12%,大部分发生在手术初期,这表明存在学习曲线。五名患者出现了轻微并发症,其中一名患者需要入院接受术后疼痛治疗:结论:1.9 毫米 Trilogy 碎石器可在 mPCNL 手术中发挥有效作用,同时使用易于实施的辅助灌洗技术,减少碎石时间与总治疗时间之间的差距。
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
Cuaj-Canadian Urological Association Journal
Cuaj-Canadian Urological Association Journal 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
10.50%
发文量
167
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: CUAJ is a a peer-reviewed, open-access journal devoted to promoting the highest standard of urological patient care through the publication of timely, relevant, evidence-based research and advocacy information.
×
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