The comparison of perioperative outcomes between percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery in elderly patients.


Journal

International journal of clinical practice
ISSN: 1742-1241
Titre abrégé: Int J Clin Pract
Pays: India
ID NLM: 9712381

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jul 2021
Historique:
revised: 01 04 2021
received: 24 02 2021
accepted: 12 04 2021
pubmed: 20 4 2021
medline: 10 7 2021
entrez: 19 4 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

In this study, we aimed to compare the outcomes and complication rates of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in elderly patients. Between April 2011 and January 2020, patients who underwent PCNL and RIRS for renal stone in elderly patients were retrospectively evaluated. The two groups' perioperative values, stone-free rates and complication rates were compared. Post-operative complications were noted according to the Clavien scoring system. There were 89 and 72 patients in the PCNL and RIRS group respectively. The median age was 67 years in both the groups (P = .192). The stone size were 22.2 ± 3.5 mm and 19.9 ± 7.1 mm in the PCNL and RIRS group, respectively (P = .082). Stone-free rates were significantly higher in PCNL group (P = .021, P = .034). Also we found that overall complication and major complication rates were significantly higher in PCNL group (P = .016, P = .029). Despite there was higher stone clearance in PCNL, the complication rates were higher compared with RIRS. So RIRS might be a safe alternative treatment method to PCNL in older patients.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33871135
doi: 10.1111/ijcp.14221
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e14221

Informations de copyright

© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Références

Romero V, Akpinar H, Assimos DG. Kidney stones: a global picture of prevalence, incidence, and associated risk factors. Rev Urol. 2010;12:e86-e96.
Türk C, Petřík A, Sarica K, et al. EAU Guidelines on Interventional Treatment for Urolithiasis. Eur Urol. 2016;69:475-482.
Wiesenthal JD, Ghiculete D, D’A Honey RJ, et al. A comparison of treatment modalities for renal calculi between 100 and 300 mm2: are shockwave lithotripsy, ureteroscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy equivalent? J Endourol. 2011;25:481-485.
Jiang K, Zhang P, Xu B, et al. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs. retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stones larger than 2 cm in patients with a solitary kidney: a systematic review and a meta-analysis. Urol J. 2020;17(5):442-448.
Koyuncu H, Yencilek F, Kalkan M, et al. Intrarenal surgery vs percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the management of lower pole stones greater than 2 cm. Int Braz J Urol. 2015;41:245-251.
Aboumarzouk OM, Monga M, Kata SG, et al. Flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy for stones > 2 cm: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endourol. 2012;26:1257-1263.
Celik S, Bozkurt O, Kaya FG, et al. Evaluation of computed tomography findings for success prediction after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for urinary tract stone disease. Int Urol Nephrol. 2015;47(1):69-73.
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205-213.
Cockcroft DW, Gault MH. Prediction of creatinine clearance from serum creatinine. Nephron. 1976;16:31-41.
Hu H, Lu Y, He D, et al. Comparison of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy and flexible ureteroscopy for the treatment of intermediate proximal ureteral and renal stones in the elderly. Urolithiasis. 2016;44:427-434.
Sahan M, Sarilar O, Savun M, et al. Adopting for supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy: analyzing the learning curve of tertiary academic center urology team. Urology. 2020;140:22-26.
Akman T, Binbay M, Ugurlu M, et al. Outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery compared with percutaneous nephrolithotomy in elderly patients with moderate-size kidney stones: a matched-pair analysis. J Endourol. 2015;26:625-629.
Gupta R, Mahajan A. Outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in elderly versus young patients under regional anesthesia: a comparative study. Urol Ann. 2020;12(3):254-258.
Knoll T, Jessen JP, Honeck P, et al. Flexible ureterorenoscopy versus miniaturized PNL for solitary renal calculi of 10-30 mm size. World J Urol. 2011;29(6):755-759.
Ozgor F, Yanaral F, Savun M, et al. Comparison of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy and flexible ureterorenoscopy for moderate size renal stones in elderly patients. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2018;34(6):352-356.
Sabnis RB, Jagtap J, Mishra S, et al. Treating renal calculi 1-2 cm in diameter with minipercutaneous or retrograde intrarenal surgery: a prospective comparative study. BJU Int. 2012;110(8):346-349.
Kirac M, Bozkurt OF, Tunc L, et al. Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of lower-pole renal stones with a diameter of smaller than 15 mm. Urolithiasis. 2013;41(3):241-246.
Pan J, Chen Q, Xue W, et al. RIRS versus mPCNL for single renal stone of 2-3 cm: clinical outcome and cost-effective analysis in Chinese medical setting. Urolithiasis. 2013;41(1):73-78.
Okeke Z, Smith AD, Labate G, et al. Prospective comparison of outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in elderly patients versus younger patients. J Endourol. 2012;26:996-1001.
Karami H, Mazloomfard MM, Golshan A, et al. Does age affect outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy? Urol J. 2010;7:17-21.
Sahin A, Atsu N, Erdem E, et al. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients aged 60 years or older. J Endourol. 2011;15:489-491.
De la Rosette JJ, Zuazu JR, Tsakiris P, et al. Prognostic factors and percutaneous nephrolithotomy morbidity: a multivariate analysis of a contemporary series using the Clavien classification. J Urol. 2008;180:2489-2493.
Tefekli A, Ali Karadag M, Tepeler K, et al. Classification of percutaneous nephrolithotomy complications using the modified Clavien grading system: looking for a standard. Eur Urol. 2008;53:184-190.

Auteurs

Serkan Yarimoglu (S)

Department of Urology, HSU Izmir Bozyaka Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, Turkey.

Murat Sahan (M)

Department of Urology, HSU Izmir Bozyaka Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, Turkey.

Salih Polat (S)

Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Amasya University, Amasya, Turkey.

Omer Koras (O)

Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Hatay University, Hatay, Turkey.

Onur Erdemoglu (O)

Department of Urology, HSU Izmir Bozyaka Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, Turkey.

Tansu Degirmenci (T)

Department of Urology, HSU Izmir Bozyaka Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, Turkey.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH