Clinical study of the puncture success rate during ultrasound-guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Q4 Medicine
Ting Huang, Yue Cheng, Guohai Xie, He-sheng Yuan, Jia-sheng Hu, Jiaqi Zhu
{"title":"Clinical study of the puncture success rate during ultrasound-guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy","authors":"Ting Huang, Yue Cheng, Guohai Xie, He-sheng Yuan, Jia-sheng Hu, Jiaqi Zhu","doi":"10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1000-6702.2019.12.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective \nTo evaluate the success rate during ultrasound-guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and analyze the reasons of puncture failure. \n \n \nMethods \nA retrospective analysis was performed based on the data of 58 patients who underwent ultrasound-guided PCNL by 4 experienced urologists(10 years' experience of PCNL and more than 80 cases per year)in our center from August 2018 to November 2018. Of all the 58 patients, there were 36 males and 22 females (aged from 22 to 73 years) with the mean age of 51 years. The calculi ranged from 9 mm to 93 mm, with the average of 26.5 mm. The separation of renal collecting system ranged from 5 mm to 30 mm, with the average of 15.1 mm. All of the 58 patients underwent one-stage PCNL and the numbers of punctures, the numbers of percutaneous tubes and the reasons for failure were recorded. \n \n \nResults \nAll percutaneous tubes and surgeries were established and done successfully. Of all the 118 punctures, 74 punctures succeeded by detecting the urine and 68 surgery tracts were established (6 punctures failed because of the dilation). The total puncture success rate was 62.7%(74/118). Of the total 74 successful punctures, 56.8%(42/74)succeeded at the first puncture, 28.4%(21/74)succeeded at the second puncture and 14.9%(11/74)succeeded at least after three punctures. The success puncture rate of the 4 urologists were 59.2%(29/49), 64.1%(25/39), 66.7%(16/24), 66.7%(4/6)respectively, and there were no statistical differences between the puncture success rates of the urologists (P=0.679). Each channel needed 1.7 punctures on average. Fouty-four punctures failed without detecting the urine, including 20 failed punctures because of the puncture tract deviation, 17 punctures without seeing the urine after the core needle being removed, 7 punctures no display on the ultrasound imagine. There were 33 punctures to be tubeless while other 35 indwelling the nephrostomy tubes. Five nephrostomy tubes' position were different with the preoperationally predicted position which means the discrepancy rate was 14.3%(5/35). One patient had complications and classified as Grade II or above on the modified Clavien Grading System of aerothorax. \n \n \nConclusions \nThe puncture success rate during ultrasound-guided PCNL is not satisfied. The main reasons of puncture failure are the deviation of puncture tract, unclear imaging of puncture tract and other unclear reasons( puncture needle went too deep or superficially or tip of the needle embedded into the stone). \n \n \nKey words: \nKidney calculi; Percutaneous nephrolithotomy; Puncture; Success rate","PeriodicalId":10343,"journal":{"name":"中华泌尿外科杂志","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中华泌尿外科杂志","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1000-6702.2019.12.010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the success rate during ultrasound-guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and analyze the reasons of puncture failure. Methods A retrospective analysis was performed based on the data of 58 patients who underwent ultrasound-guided PCNL by 4 experienced urologists(10 years' experience of PCNL and more than 80 cases per year)in our center from August 2018 to November 2018. Of all the 58 patients, there were 36 males and 22 females (aged from 22 to 73 years) with the mean age of 51 years. The calculi ranged from 9 mm to 93 mm, with the average of 26.5 mm. The separation of renal collecting system ranged from 5 mm to 30 mm, with the average of 15.1 mm. All of the 58 patients underwent one-stage PCNL and the numbers of punctures, the numbers of percutaneous tubes and the reasons for failure were recorded. Results All percutaneous tubes and surgeries were established and done successfully. Of all the 118 punctures, 74 punctures succeeded by detecting the urine and 68 surgery tracts were established (6 punctures failed because of the dilation). The total puncture success rate was 62.7%(74/118). Of the total 74 successful punctures, 56.8%(42/74)succeeded at the first puncture, 28.4%(21/74)succeeded at the second puncture and 14.9%(11/74)succeeded at least after three punctures. The success puncture rate of the 4 urologists were 59.2%(29/49), 64.1%(25/39), 66.7%(16/24), 66.7%(4/6)respectively, and there were no statistical differences between the puncture success rates of the urologists (P=0.679). Each channel needed 1.7 punctures on average. Fouty-four punctures failed without detecting the urine, including 20 failed punctures because of the puncture tract deviation, 17 punctures without seeing the urine after the core needle being removed, 7 punctures no display on the ultrasound imagine. There were 33 punctures to be tubeless while other 35 indwelling the nephrostomy tubes. Five nephrostomy tubes' position were different with the preoperationally predicted position which means the discrepancy rate was 14.3%(5/35). One patient had complications and classified as Grade II or above on the modified Clavien Grading System of aerothorax. Conclusions The puncture success rate during ultrasound-guided PCNL is not satisfied. The main reasons of puncture failure are the deviation of puncture tract, unclear imaging of puncture tract and other unclear reasons( puncture needle went too deep or superficially or tip of the needle embedded into the stone). Key words: Kidney calculi; Percutaneous nephrolithotomy; Puncture; Success rate
超声引导下经皮肾穿刺取石术穿刺成功率的临床研究
目的评价超声引导下经皮肾取石术(PCNL)的成功率,分析穿刺失败的原因。方法回顾性分析2018年8月至2018年11月在我中心由4位经验丰富的泌尿科医生(有10年PCNL经验,每年80多例)进行超声引导下PCNL的58例患者的数据。58例患者中,男性36例,女性22例(年龄22-73岁),平均年龄51岁。结石范围为9mm-93mm,平均26.5mm。肾收集系统分离范围为5mm-30mm,平均15.1mm。58例患者均接受了一期PCNL,并记录了穿刺次数、经皮穿刺管数量和失败原因。结果所有经皮导管和手术均成功建立并完成。在所有118次穿刺中,74次穿刺通过尿液检测成功,68条手术道建立(6次穿刺因扩张而失败)。总穿刺成功率为62.7%(74/118),其中56.8%(42/74)第一次穿刺成功,28.4%(21/74)第二次穿刺成功;14.9%(11/74)至少三次穿刺成功。4位泌尿科医生穿刺成功率分别为59.2%(29/49)、64.1%(25/39)、66.7%(16/24)和66.7%(4/6),泌尿科医生的穿刺成功率无统计学差异(P=0.679),每个通道平均需要穿刺1.7次。有4次穿刺失败,但没有检测到尿液,其中20次穿刺失败是因为穿刺道偏移,17次穿刺在取出芯针后没有看到尿液,7次穿刺在超声波图像上没有显示。其中33个穿刺为无管穿刺,另外35个留置肾造瘘管。5根肾造瘘管的位置与术前预测的位置不同,差异率为14.3%(5/35)。1名患者出现并发症,在改良的Clavien气胸分级系统中被归类为II级或以上。结论超声引导下PCNL穿刺成功率不高。穿刺失败的主要原因是穿刺道偏移、穿刺道成像不清楚以及其他不清楚的原因(穿刺针过深或过浅或针尖嵌入结石)。关键词:肾结石;经皮肾取石术;穿刺;成功率
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
中华泌尿外科杂志
中华泌尿外科杂志 Medicine-Nephrology
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14180
期刊介绍: Chinese Journal of Urology (monthly) was founded in 1980. It is a publicly issued academic journal supervised by the China Association for Science and Technology and sponsored by the Chinese Medical Association. It mainly publishes original research papers, reviews and comments in this field. This journal mainly reports on the latest scientific research results and clinical diagnosis and treatment experience in the professional field of urology at home and abroad, as well as basic theoretical research results closely related to clinical practice. The journal has columns such as treatises, abstracts of treatises, experimental studies, case reports, experience exchanges, reviews, reviews, lectures, etc. Chinese Journal of Urology has been included in well-known databases such as Peking University Journal (Chinese Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences), CSCD Chinese Science Citation Database Source Journal (including extended version), and also included in American Chemical Abstracts (CA). The journal has been rated as a quality journal by the Association for Science and Technology and as an excellent journal by the Chinese Medical Association.
×
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