Retroperitoneal vs transperitoneal laparoscopic pyelolithotomy; a single surgeon's experience.
Kidney stone
Laparoscopy
Retroperitoneal
Staghorn
Transperitoneal
Journal
World journal of urology
ISSN: 1433-8726
Titre abrégé: World J Urol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8307716
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 Oct 2024
03 Oct 2024
Historique:
received:
23
06
2024
accepted:
09
09
2024
medline:
3
10
2024
pubmed:
3
10
2024
entrez:
3
10
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To compare the outcomes of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyelolithotomy procedures. A total of 104 consecutive laparoscopic pyelolithotomy surgeries performed by a single surgeon on patients with staghorn or renal pelvic calculi larger than 20 mm were evaluated. Intraoperative and postoperative clinical parameters from two groups, transperitoneal (TLPL) (N = 55) and retroperitoneal (RLPL) (N = 49), were compared. The surgeon performed TLPL for the first five years and then switched to the RLPL approach for the next five years. There were no significant differences in general demographic variables and stone size (26.55 vs. 24.73 mm, P = 0.8). Operation time and change in serum creatinine levels did not significantly differ between the two approaches. However, patients who underwent TLPL had longer hospital stays than RLPL (3.23 ± 1.21 vs. 2.36 ± 1.10 days, P = 0.0001). Additionally, TLPL was associated with a greater drop in hemoglobin levels (1.53 ± 1.04 vs. 1.17 ± 0.68, P = 0.04), higher rates of postoperative fever (12.7% vs. 0.0%, P = 0.01). The retroperitoneal approach in laparoscopic pyelolithotomy for large renal pelvic stones resulted in fewer postoperative fevers, reduced hemoglobin drops, and shorter hospital stays than the transperitoneal approach. However, the stone-free rates were similar for both groups.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39361045
doi: 10.1007/s00345-024-05265-x
pii: 10.1007/s00345-024-05265-x
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Comparative Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
559Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Pearle MS, Calhoun EA, Curhan GC et al (2005) Urologic diseases in America project: urolithiasis. J Urol 173:848–857
doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000152082.14384.d7
pubmed: 15711292
Rosette Jdl, Assimos D, Desai M et al (2011) The clinical research office of the endourological society percutaneous nephrolithotomy global study: indications, complications, and outcomes in 5803 patients. J Endourol 25:11–17
doi: 10.1089/end.2010.0424
Autorino R, Kaouk JH, Yakoubi R et al (2012) Urological laparoendoscopic single site surgery: multi-institutional analysis of risk factors for conversion and postoperative complications. J Urol 187:1989–1994. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.01.062
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.01.062
pubmed: 22498207
Turna B, Umul M, Demiryoguran S et al (2007) How do increasing stone surface area and stone configuration affect overall outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy? J Endourol 21:34–43
doi: 10.1089/end.2005.0315
pubmed: 17263605
el-Nahas AR, Eraky I, Shokeir AA et al (2012) Factors affecting stone-free rate and complications of percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treatment of staghorn stone. Urology 79:1236–1241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2012.01.026 [published Online First: 2012/04/03]
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2012.01.026
pubmed: 22465085
Nouralizadeh A, Pakmanesh H, Basiri A et al (2016) Solo Sonographically guided PCNL under spinal anesthesia: defining predictors of success. Scientifica (Cairo) 2016:5938514. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/5938514
doi: 10.1155/2016/5938514
pubmed: 27242949
Sharifiaghdas F, Tabibi A, Nouralizadeh A et al (2015) Our experience with totally Ultrasonography-guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children. J Endourol 35(5):749–752. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2014.0660
doi: 10.1089/end.2014.0660
pubmed: 26058433
Nouralizadeh A, Sharifiaghdas F, Pakmanesh H et al (2018) Fluoroscopy-free ultrasonography-guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy in pediatric patients: a single-center experience. World J Urol 36(4):667–671. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2184-z
doi: 10.1007/s00345-018-2184-z
pubmed: 29349571
Pakmanesh H, Daneshpajooh A, Mirzaei M et al (2019) Amplatz versus Balloon for Tract Dilation in Ultrasonographically guided Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: a Randomized Clinical Trial. Biomed Res Int 2019(3428123). https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/3428123
Pakmanesh H, Mirzaei M, Mohammad_Salehi S et al (2020) Different aspect of Transperitoneal Laparoscopic Pyelolithotomy for Management of Pelvic stones larger than 20 mm: a Cuasi-Experimental study in male patients. Men’s Health J 4:e13–e13
Mao T, Wei N, Yu J et al (2021) Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic pyelolithotomy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treatment of large renal stones: a meta-analysis. J Int Med Res 49(1):300060520983136. https://doi.org/10.1177/0300060520983136 [published Online First: 2021/01/22]
doi: 10.1177/0300060520983136
pubmed: 33472474
Wang X, Li S, Liu T et al (2013) Laparoscopic pyelolithotomy compared to percutaneous nephrolithotomy as surgical management for large renal pelvic calculi: a meta-analysis. J Urol 190(3):888–893
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.02.092
pubmed: 23454154
Rui X, Hu H, Yu Y et al (2016) Comparison of safety and efficacy of laparoscopic pyelolithotomy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with large renal pelvic stones: a meta-analysis. J Investig Med 64(6):1134–1142
doi: 10.1136/jim-2015-000053
pubmed: 27222519
Pakmanesh H, MohammadSalehi S, Mirzaei M et al (2024) Medium-term stone recurrence after zero-fragment transperitoneal laparoscopic pyelolithotomy compared with Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for large single renal Pelvis stones. Urol J 21(1):35–39. https://doi.org/10.22037/uj.v20i.7676
doi: 10.22037/uj.v20i.7676
pubmed: 38087970
Radfar MH, Valipour R, Narouie B et al (2018) Role of the gonadal vessels on the stone lodgment in the proximal ureter: direct observation during laparoscopic ureterolithotomy. Arch Ital Urol Androl 90(3):163–165. https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2018.3.163
doi: 10.4081/aiua.2018.3.163
pubmed: 30362678
Abat D, Altunkol A, Kuyucu F et al (2016) After a urological laparoscopic training programme, which laparoscopic method is safer and more feasible in the management of proximal ureteral stones: transperitoneal or retroperitoneal? JPMA J Pakistan Med Association 66(8):971–976 [published Online First: 2016/08/16]
Al-Hunayan A, Abdulhalim H, El‐Bakry E et al (2009) Laparoscopic pyelolithotomy: is the retroperitoneal route a better approach? Int J Urol 16(2):181–186
doi: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2008.02210.x
pubmed: 19183229
Ziaee SA, Kazemi B, Moghaddam SM et al (2008) A study of febrile versus afebrile patients after percutaneous nephrolithotomy regarding bacterial etiologic factors through blood and urine cultures and 16S rRNA detection in serum. J Endourol 22(12):2717–2721. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2007.0417
doi: 10.1089/end.2007.0417
pubmed: 19099518
Basiri A, Arab D, Pakmanesh H et al (2020) An overnight stay versus three days admission after uncomplicated percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a Randomized Clinical Trial. Urol J 17(4):352–357. https://doi.org/10.22037/uj.v0i0.5314
doi: 10.22037/uj.v0i0.5314
pubmed: 31535360
Tanriverdi O, Boylu U, Kendirci M et al (2007) The learning curve in the training of percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 52(1):206–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2007.01.001 [published Online First: 2007/01/19]
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.01.001
pubmed: 17229522