Impacts of urinary tract anomalies or history of upper urinary tract surgery on outcome of mini-ECIRS (endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery).
Humans
Female
Male
Middle Aged
Retrospective Studies
Treatment Outcome
Aged
Adult
Postoperative Complications
/ epidemiology
Ureteroscopy
/ adverse effects
Kidney Calculi
/ surgery
Urinary Tract
/ surgery
Urogenital Abnormalities
/ surgery
Urologic Surgical Procedures
/ methods
Endoscopy
/ methods
Operative Time
Complications
Mini-endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery
Renal stones
Stone free rates
Ureteral stones
Urinary tract anomalies
Journal
Urolithiasis
ISSN: 2194-7236
Titre abrégé: Urolithiasis
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101602699
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 Oct 2024
09 Oct 2024
Historique:
received:
30
04
2024
accepted:
30
09
2024
medline:
9
10
2024
pubmed:
9
10
2024
entrez:
9
10
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
This study assessed the impact of urinary tract anomalies or a history of upper urinary tract surgery (UTAS) on the minimally invasive endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery (mini-ECIRS) outcomes. Data from 1432 patients undergoing ECIRS for urolithiasis at three Japanese tertiary institutions between 2015 and 2021 were analyzed, with patients categorized into those with normal urinary tracts (non-UTAS) and those with UTAS (UTAS). We retrospectively examined the association between the UTAS and perioperative outcomes in mini-ECIRS. Of the 1096 cases in the final analysis, 1035 and 61 were identified as non-UTAS and UTAS, respectively. Stone-free rate (residual fragments > 2 mm, 62.8% vs. 62.7%), operation time (110.5 vs. 115.0 min), and hospital stay duration (5.6 vs. 5.7 days) showed no significant differences between non-UTAS and UTAS. The UTAS group demonstrated significantly higher rates of preoperative pyuria (86.2% vs. 71.1%), preoperative urinary tract infection (32.8% vs. 15.5%), preoperative stenting (52.5% vs. 31.0%), and preoperative nephrostomy (24.6% vs. 9.2%). However, the postoperative fever (26.3% vs. 25.0%) or septic shock (1.9% vs. 0%) were comparable between non-UTAS and UTAS. Stone burden and the number of calyces involved were significantly associated with a low stone-free rate (P < 0.001). Younger age, female sex, solitary stones, number of calyces involved, preoperative urinary tract infection, and absence of preoperative nephrostomy were identified as risk factors for perioperative complications. The UTAS was not associated with stone-free outcomes or perioperative complications. Mini-ECIRS demonstrated comparable stone-free outcomes and safety in patients with UTAS and those with normal urinary tracts.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39382724
doi: 10.1007/s00240-024-01638-4
pii: 10.1007/s00240-024-01638-4
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
138Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Scoffone CM, Cracco CM, Cossu M, Grande S, Poggio M, Scarpa RM (2008) Endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia position: a new standard for percutaneous nephrolithotomy? Eur Urol 54(6):1393–1403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2008.07.073
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.07.073
pubmed: 18715696
Usui K, Komeya M, Taguri M, Kataoka K, Asai T, Ogawa T, Yao M, Matsuzaki J (2020) Minimally invasive versus standard endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery for renal stones: a retrospective pilot study analysis. Int Urol Nephrol 52(7):1219–1225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-020-02433-x
doi: 10.1007/s11255-020-02433-x
pubmed: 32130621
Singh AG, Jairath A, Balaji SS, Tak G, Ganpule AP, Vijayakumar M, Sabnis RB, Desai MR (2019) Changing trends in the endourological management of urolithiasis in anomalous kidneys. BJU Int 123(2):318–327. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14575
doi: 10.1111/bju.14575
pubmed: 30281895
Gambaro G, Fabris A, Puliatta D, Lupo A (2006) Lithiasis in cystic kidney disease and malformations of the urinary tract. Urol Res 34(2):102–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-005-0019-z
doi: 10.1007/s00240-005-0019-z
pubmed: 16416113
Wani M, Mohamed AHA, Brown G, Sriprasad S, Madaan S (2023) Challenges and options for management of stones in anomalous kidneys: a review of current literature. Ther Adv Urol 15:17562872231217796. https://doi.org/10.1177/17562872231217797
doi: 10.1177/17562872231217797
pubmed: 38146488
pmcid: 10749522
Kuroda S, Ito H, Sakamaki K, Tabei T, Kawahara T, Terao H, Fujikawa A, Makiyama K, Yao M, Matsuzaki J (2015) Development and internal validation of a classification system for predicting success rates after endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in the modified valdivia position for large renal stones. Urology 86(4):697–702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.07.002
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2015.07.002
pubmed: 26190085
Ito H, Sakamaki K, Fukuda T, Yamamichi F, Watanabe T, Tabei T, Inoue T, Matsuzaki J, Kobayashi K (2023) Models to predict the surgical outcome of mini-ECIRS (endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery) for renal and/or ureteral stones. Sci Rep 13(1):22848. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-50022-6
doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-50022-6
pubmed: 38129560
pmcid: 10739798
García Rojo E, Teoh JY, Castellani D, Brime Menéndez R, Tanidir Y, Benedetto Galosi A, Bhatia TP, Soebhali B, Sridharan V, Corrales M, Vaddi CM, Shrestha A, Singh A, Lakmichi MA, Ragoori D, Sepulveda F, Hamri SB, Ganpule AP, Emiliani E, Somani B, Traxer O, Gauhar V (2022) Real-world global outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery in anomalous kidneys: a high volume international multicenter study. Urology 159:41–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2021.10.003
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2021.10.003
pubmed: 34715241
Lavan L, Herrmann T, Netsch C, Becker B, Somani BK (2020) Outcomes of ureteroscopy for stone disease in anomalous kidneys: a systematic review. World J Urol 38(5):1135–1146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02810-x
doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-02810-x
pubmed: 31101967
Ugurlu İM, Akman T, Binbay M, Tekinarslan E, Yazıcı Ö, Akbulut MF, Özgör F, Müslümanoğlu AY (2015) Outcomes of retrograde flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy for stone disease in patients with anomalous kidneys. Urolithiasis 43(1):77–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-014-0713-9
doi: 10.1007/s00240-014-0713-9
pubmed: 25161087
Gupta NP, Mishra S, Seth A, Anand A (2009) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in abnormal kidneys: single-center experience. Urology 73(4):710–714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2008.10.070 . (Discussion 714-715)
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2008.10.070
pubmed: 19193423
Prakash G, Sinha RJ, Jhanwar A, Bansal A, Singh V (2017) Outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in anomalous kidney: is it different? Urol Ann 9(1):23–26. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-7796.198836
doi: 10.4103/0974-7796.198836
pubmed: 28216924
pmcid: 5308032
Mahar NA, Qureshi HH, Mustafa G, Memon MM, Kalwar SR, Sultan G (2023) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in anomalous kidney. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 33(12):1414–1417
pubmed: 38062599
Zhou C, Yin G, Jiang Z, Tan J, Huang K, Yuan P (2023) Mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for the treatment of 10–20-mm kidney stones in patients with ileal conduit: a comparative study. Minerva Urol Nephrol 75(5):616–624
doi: 10.23736/S2724-6051.23.05394-6
pubmed: 37728497
Yamashita S, Kohjimoto Y, Iba A, Kikkawa K, Hara I (2017) Stone size is a predictor for residual stone and multiple procedures of endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery. Scand J Urol 51(2):159–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681805.2017.1284897
doi: 10.1080/21681805.2017.1284897
pubmed: 28635566
Tabei T, Ito H, Usui K, Kuroda S, Kawahara T, Terao H, Fujikawa A, Makiyama K, Yao M, Matsuzaki J (2016) Risk factors of systemic inflammation response syndrome after endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in the modified Valdivia position. Int J Urol 23(8):687–692. https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.13124
doi: 10.1111/iju.13124
pubmed: 27184104
Liu C, Zhang X, Liu Y, Wang P (2013) Prevention and treatment of septic shock following mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a single-center retrospective study of 834 cases. World J Urol 31(6):1593–1597. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-012-1002-2
doi: 10.1007/s00345-012-1002-2
pubmed: 23247821
Zhao Z, Wu W, Zeng T, Wu X, Liu Y, Zeng G (2021) The impact of nephrostomy drainage prior to mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with ESBL-positive Escherichia coli. World J Urol 39(1):239–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03155-6
doi: 10.1007/s00345-020-03155-6
pubmed: 32198565
Benson AD, Juliano TM, Miller NL (2014) Infectious outcomes of nephrostomy drainage before percutaneous nephrolithotomy compared to concurrent access. J Urol 192(3):770–774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.03.004
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2014.03.004
pubmed: 24631102
Ito H, Kawahara T, Terao H, Ogawa T, Yao M, Kubota Y (2012) The most reliable preoperative assessment of renal stone burden as a predictor of stone-free status after flexible ureteroscopy with holmium laser lithotripsy: a single-center experience. Urology 80(3):524–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2012.04.001
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2012.04.001
pubmed: 22658621