Does age impact outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery in the elderly? Results from 366 patients from the FLEXible ureteroscopy outcomes registry (FLEXOR).


Journal

Aging clinical and experimental research
ISSN: 1720-8319
Titre abrégé: Aging Clin Exp Res
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101132995

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Nov 2023
Historique:
received: 21 06 2023
accepted: 20 08 2023
medline: 8 11 2023
pubmed: 8 9 2023
entrez: 8 9 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

There has been a consistent increase in the last decades in prevalence of renal stones in elderly. To evaluate outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for renal stones in elderly and factors associated with postoperative complications and residual fragments (RFs). Data from 12 centers were retrospectively reviewed.  ≥ 75 years, renal stones only, normal renal anatomy. Patients were divided into three groups; Group 1: patients aged 75-79 years; Group 2: age 80-84 years; Group 3: age ≥ 85 years. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess factors associated with perioperative complications, sepsis, and RFs. 366 patients were included. There were 189 patients in Group 1, 113 in Group 2, and 64 in Group 3. There was no difference between groups regarding stone features and total surgical time. Median length of stay was significantly longer in Group 3 (6.0 days, vs 2.0 days in Group 2 vs 2.5 days in Group 1, p = 0.043). There was no significant difference in postoperative complications and RFs between the groups. At multivariable logistic regression analysis, female gender (OR 2.82) and maximum stone diameter (OR 1.14) were associated with higher odds of sepsis, while surgical time (OR 1.12) and the use of a reusable ureteroscope (OR 6.51) with overall complications. Stone size (OR 1.23) was associated with higher odds of RFs. RIRS showed safety and efficacy for kidney stones in elderly patients. Surgical time should be kept as short as possible to avoid higher odds of postoperative complications, particularly in females.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
There has been a consistent increase in the last decades in prevalence of renal stones in elderly.
AIMS OBJECTIVE
To evaluate outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for renal stones in elderly and factors associated with postoperative complications and residual fragments (RFs).
METHODS METHODS
Data from 12 centers were retrospectively reviewed.
INCLUSION CRITERIA METHODS
 ≥ 75 years, renal stones only, normal renal anatomy. Patients were divided into three groups; Group 1: patients aged 75-79 years; Group 2: age 80-84 years; Group 3: age ≥ 85 years. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess factors associated with perioperative complications, sepsis, and RFs.
RESULTS RESULTS
366 patients were included. There were 189 patients in Group 1, 113 in Group 2, and 64 in Group 3. There was no difference between groups regarding stone features and total surgical time. Median length of stay was significantly longer in Group 3 (6.0 days, vs 2.0 days in Group 2 vs 2.5 days in Group 1, p = 0.043). There was no significant difference in postoperative complications and RFs between the groups. At multivariable logistic regression analysis, female gender (OR 2.82) and maximum stone diameter (OR 1.14) were associated with higher odds of sepsis, while surgical time (OR 1.12) and the use of a reusable ureteroscope (OR 6.51) with overall complications. Stone size (OR 1.23) was associated with higher odds of RFs.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
RIRS showed safety and efficacy for kidney stones in elderly patients. Surgical time should be kept as short as possible to avoid higher odds of postoperative complications, particularly in females.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37682489
doi: 10.1007/s40520-023-02545-1
pii: 10.1007/s40520-023-02545-1
pmc: PMC10627914
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

2711-2719

Informations de copyright

© 2023. The Author(s).

Références

Crit Care. 2011 Jun 21;15(3):R151
pubmed: 21693012
World J Urol. 2023 May;41(5):1407-1413
pubmed: 36930255
JAMA. 2016 Feb 23;315(8):801-10
pubmed: 26903338
JAMA. 2002 Jan 16;287(3):337-44
pubmed: 11790213
Eur Urol Open Sci. 2022 Aug 30;44:84-91
pubmed: 36071820
Int Braz J Urol. 2018 Jul-Aug;44(4):750-757
pubmed: 29522293
World J Urol. 2023 Feb;41(2):567-574
pubmed: 36536170
Eur Respir J. 2014 Oct;44(4):1055-68
pubmed: 25142482
World J Urol. 2002 May;20(1):68-71
pubmed: 12088195
Curr Urol Rep. 2020 Mar 24;21(4):17
pubmed: 32211985
Kidney Int. 2003 Dec;64(6):2204-13
pubmed: 14633144
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010 Apr;58(4):681-7
pubmed: 20345864
J Urol. 2011 Apr;185(4):1304-11
pubmed: 21334658
Lancet. 2017 Apr 1;389(10076):1323-1335
pubmed: 28236464
Res Rep Urol. 2021 Feb 10;13:63-71
pubmed: 33604311
J Urol. 2012 Jul;188(1):130-7
pubmed: 22591962
J Am Coll Surg. 2006 Dec;203(6):865-77
pubmed: 17116555
Arch Esp Urol. 2021 Jan;74(1):16-23
pubmed: 33459618
J Urol. 2015 Jul;194(1):137-43
pubmed: 25676432
Aging Clin Exp Res. 2019 Jul;31(7):993-999
pubmed: 30191455
J Endourol. 2012 Mar;26(3):209-13
pubmed: 22010975
J Endourol. 2023 Mar;37(3):245-250
pubmed: 36458461
World J Urol. 2021 Jul;39(7):2703-2708
pubmed: 32960326
Urolithiasis. 2016 Oct;44(5):427-34
pubmed: 26705003
Int J Surg. 2017 Jun;42:147-151
pubmed: 28476544
Sci Rep. 2020 Mar 30;10(1):5701
pubmed: 32231344
Actas Urol Esp (Engl Ed). 2023 Nov;47(9):581-587
pubmed: 37369300
JAMA. 2014 Feb 26;311(8):844-54
pubmed: 24570248
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2010 Mar;104(3):183-90; quiz 190-2, 210
pubmed: 20377107
BMC Anesthesiol. 2023 Mar 31;23(1):102
pubmed: 37003967

Auteurs

Carlo Giulioni (C)

Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Delle Marche, Università Politecnica Delle Marche, Via Conca 71, 60126, Ancona, Italy. carlo.giulioni9@gmail.com.

Carlo Brocca (C)

Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Delle Marche, Università Politecnica Delle Marche, Via Conca 71, 60126, Ancona, Italy.

Vineet Gauhar (V)

Department of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Jurong East, Singapore.

Bhaskar Kumar Somani (BK)

Department of Urology, University Hospitals Southampton, NHS Trust, Southampton, UK.

Ben Hall Chew (BH)

Department of Urology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.

Olivier Traxer (O)

Department of Urology AP-HP, Sorbonne University, Tenon Hospital, Paris, France.

Esteban Emiliani (E)

Department of Urology, Fundación Puigvert, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Takaki Innoue (T)

Department of Urology and Stone Center, Hara Genitourinary Hospital, Kobe, Hyogo, Japan.

Kemal Sarica (K)

Department of Urology, Biruni University Medical School, Istanbul, Turkey.

Nariman Gadzhiev (N)

Endourology department, Saint-Petersburg State Medical University, Saint-Petersburg, Russia.

Yiloren Tanidir (Y)

Department of Urology, Marmara University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey.

Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh (JY)

Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, S.H. Ho Urology Centre, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.

Andrea Benedetto Galosi (AB)

Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Delle Marche, Università Politecnica Delle Marche, Via Conca 71, 60126, Ancona, Italy.

Daniele Castellani (D)

Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Delle Marche, Università Politecnica Delle Marche, Via Conca 71, 60126, Ancona, Italy.

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