Anna Ricapito, Kavita Gupta, Ziv Savin, Kasmira R Gupta, Christopher Connors, Raymond Khargi, Alan J Yaghoubian, Blair Gallante, William M Atallah, Mantu Gupta
{"title":"仰卧位经皮肾镜取石术中颅骨前方入路与颅骨后方入路的安全性和有效性对比分析","authors":"Anna Ricapito, Kavita Gupta, Ziv Savin, Kasmira R Gupta, Christopher Connors, Raymond Khargi, Alan J Yaghoubian, Blair Gallante, William M Atallah, Mantu Gupta","doi":"10.1089/end.2024.0508","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Introduction:</i></b> One advantage of supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy (sPCNL) is the ability to access anterior as well as posterior calyces, but the safety and efficacy of anterior calyceal entry has never been investigated to our knowledge. We prospectively evaluated patients scheduled for sPCNL comparing anterior and posterior calyceal access. <b><i>Materials and Methods:</i></b> After Institutional Review Board approval, we prospectively enrolled 100 consecutive patients undergoing sPCNL from February to September 2023. Primary outcomes included intraoperative complications, blood transfusions, 30-day complication rates, and emergency department (ED) visits or readmissions. Secondary outcomes included stone-free rates (SFR). <b><i>Results:</i></b> Seventy-six patients had anterior calyceal entry and 24 had posterior. No significant differences were found in terms of baseline demographics (age, body mass index), stone characteristics (location, density, complexity), or intraoperative features (operative time, location of access). Safety outcomes, including intraoperative complications (1% <i>vs</i> 4%), blood transfusions (3% <i>vs</i> 8%), 30-day complication rates (17% <i>vs</i> 21%), and ED visits (1% <i>vs</i> 0) or readmissions (11% <i>vs</i> 21%) were comparable between groups. Overall SFRs were equivalent (86% <i>vs</i> 90%). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> We found that anterior and posterior accesses in sPCNL offer similar safety and efficacy, with no significant differences in complications or SFRs. Surgeons can select either approach based on patient anatomy and surgical needs without concern for increased complications. Further research is necessary to confirm these findings and guide best practices for calyx selection in sPCNL.</p>","PeriodicalId":15723,"journal":{"name":"Journal of endourology","volume":" ","pages":"19-25"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Analysis of Safety and Efficacy Between Anterior and Posterior Calyceal Entry in Supine Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy.\",\"authors\":\"Anna Ricapito, Kavita Gupta, Ziv Savin, Kasmira R Gupta, Christopher Connors, Raymond Khargi, Alan J Yaghoubian, Blair Gallante, William M Atallah, Mantu Gupta\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/end.2024.0508\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b><i>Introduction:</i></b> One advantage of supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy (sPCNL) is the ability to access anterior as well as posterior calyces, but the safety and efficacy of anterior calyceal entry has never been investigated to our knowledge. We prospectively evaluated patients scheduled for sPCNL comparing anterior and posterior calyceal access. <b><i>Materials and Methods:</i></b> After Institutional Review Board approval, we prospectively enrolled 100 consecutive patients undergoing sPCNL from February to September 2023. Primary outcomes included intraoperative complications, blood transfusions, 30-day complication rates, and emergency department (ED) visits or readmissions. Secondary outcomes included stone-free rates (SFR). <b><i>Results:</i></b> Seventy-six patients had anterior calyceal entry and 24 had posterior. No significant differences were found in terms of baseline demographics (age, body mass index), stone characteristics (location, density, complexity), or intraoperative features (operative time, location of access). Safety outcomes, including intraoperative complications (1% <i>vs</i> 4%), blood transfusions (3% <i>vs</i> 8%), 30-day complication rates (17% <i>vs</i> 21%), and ED visits (1% <i>vs</i> 0) or readmissions (11% <i>vs</i> 21%) were comparable between groups. Overall SFRs were equivalent (86% <i>vs</i> 90%). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> We found that anterior and posterior accesses in sPCNL offer similar safety and efficacy, with no significant differences in complications or SFRs. Surgeons can select either approach based on patient anatomy and surgical needs without concern for increased complications. Further research is necessary to confirm these findings and guide best practices for calyx selection in sPCNL.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15723,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of endourology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"19-25\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of endourology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2024.0508\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/29 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of endourology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2024.0508","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative Analysis of Safety and Efficacy Between Anterior and Posterior Calyceal Entry in Supine Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy.
Introduction: One advantage of supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy (sPCNL) is the ability to access anterior as well as posterior calyces, but the safety and efficacy of anterior calyceal entry has never been investigated to our knowledge. We prospectively evaluated patients scheduled for sPCNL comparing anterior and posterior calyceal access. Materials and Methods: After Institutional Review Board approval, we prospectively enrolled 100 consecutive patients undergoing sPCNL from February to September 2023. Primary outcomes included intraoperative complications, blood transfusions, 30-day complication rates, and emergency department (ED) visits or readmissions. Secondary outcomes included stone-free rates (SFR). Results: Seventy-six patients had anterior calyceal entry and 24 had posterior. No significant differences were found in terms of baseline demographics (age, body mass index), stone characteristics (location, density, complexity), or intraoperative features (operative time, location of access). Safety outcomes, including intraoperative complications (1% vs 4%), blood transfusions (3% vs 8%), 30-day complication rates (17% vs 21%), and ED visits (1% vs 0) or readmissions (11% vs 21%) were comparable between groups. Overall SFRs were equivalent (86% vs 90%). Conclusion: We found that anterior and posterior accesses in sPCNL offer similar safety and efficacy, with no significant differences in complications or SFRs. Surgeons can select either approach based on patient anatomy and surgical needs without concern for increased complications. Further research is necessary to confirm these findings and guide best practices for calyx selection in sPCNL.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Endourology, JE Case Reports, and Videourology are the leading peer-reviewed journal, case reports publication, and innovative videojournal companion covering all aspects of minimally invasive urology research, applications, and clinical outcomes.
The leading journal of minimally invasive urology for over 30 years, Journal of Endourology is the essential publication for practicing surgeons who want to keep up with the latest surgical technologies in endoscopic, laparoscopic, robotic, and image-guided procedures as they apply to benign and malignant diseases of the genitourinary tract. This flagship journal includes the companion videojournal Videourology™ with every subscription. While Journal of Endourology remains focused on publishing rigorously peer reviewed articles, Videourology accepts original videos containing material that has not been reported elsewhere, except in the form of an abstract or a conference presentation.
Journal of Endourology coverage includes:
The latest laparoscopic, robotic, endoscopic, and image-guided techniques for treating both benign and malignant conditions
Pioneering research articles
Controversial cases in endourology
Techniques in endourology with accompanying videos
Reviews and epochs in endourology
Endourology survey section of endourology relevant manuscripts published in other journals.