Kuwait Medical Electronic Library

Current trends in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: an internet-based survey

Abd Alrahman Ahmad 1, Omar Alhunaidi 1, Mohamed Aziz 2, Mohamed Omar 2, Ahmed M Al-Kandari 3, Ahmed El-Nahas 4, Mohamed El-Shazly 5

Affiliations

expand

doi: 10.1177/1756287217724726

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to report current practices of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) among endourologists.

Methods: An internet survey was administered to Endourological Society members. Responders were distributed into three groups according to the number of PCNL cases per year (<50, 50-100, >100). PCNL technical details as well as opinions regarding specific clinical case scenarios were evaluated and compared between groups.

Results: We received 300 responses from 47 different countries. Prone position was used in 77% of cases, while 16% used supine position and only 7% used modified lateral decubitus. Most endourologists performed their own access. There were no significant differences between the three groups regarding patient position (p = 0.1), puncture acquisition by urologist or radiologist (p = 0.2) and fluoroscopic puncture technique (p = 0.2). Endourologists with high annual PCNL practice (>100) had least probability to utilize nephrostomy tube (p = 0.0005) or use balloon dilator (p = 0.0001). They also had the highest probability of performing mini-PERC (p = 0.0001).

Conclusions: The majority of endourologists performing PCNL obtain their own access. Prone positioning is predominant, while totally tubeless PCNL are uncommon. Mini-PERC is gaining more popularity among endourologists. Most endourologists follow the guidelines for their choice of treatment modality in different sizes and locations of upper tract calculi.

Keywords: nephrolithotomy; percutaneous; survey; trends.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Cited by

Optimizing stone harvesting in miniaturized-PCNL: a critical examination of renal access angles, technology, and the role they play in operative efficiency.

Schmanke K, Ito W, Prokop D, Kannady B, Sardiu M, Whiles B, Neff D, Duchene D, Molina W.World J Urol. 2023 Jul;41(7):1943-1949. doi: 10.1007/s00345-023-04436-6. Epub 2023 Jun 5.PMID: 37277509

Ultrasound versus fluoroscopy as imaging guidance for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Arabzadeh Bahri R, Maleki S, Shafiee A, Shobeiri P.PLoS One. 2023 Mar 2;18(3):e0276708. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0276708. eCollection 2023.PMID: 36862676 Free PMC article.

Reliability of nephrolithometric nomograms in patients treated with minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A precision study.

Mazzon G, Claps F, Pavan N, Choong S, Zeng G, Wu W, Zhong J, Bada M, Pirozzi M, Vitale R, Celia A.Asian J Urol. 2023 Jan;10(1):70-80. doi: 10.1016/j.ajur.2022.02.010. Epub 2022 Jul 5.PMID: 36721700 Free PMC article.

Comparison between prone and supine nephrolithotomy in pediatric population: a double center experience.

Campobasso D, Bocchialini T, Bevilacqua L, Guarino G, Di Pietro C, Granelli P, Mezzogori D, Salsi P, Oltolina P, Gatti C, Puliatti S, Ceccarelli PL, Maestroni U, Frattini A, Bianchi G, Micali S, Ferretti S.Int Urol Nephrol. 2022 Dec;54(12):3063-3068. doi: 10.1007/s11255-022-03341-y. Epub 2022 Aug 13.PMID: 35962906

Comparative Study of Externalized Ureteral Catheter Versus Double-J Stent on Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Habib B, Hassan S, Roman M, Anwar K, Latif A.Cureus. 2022 Mar 8;14(3):e22967. doi: 10.7759/cureus.22967. eCollection 2022 Mar.PMID: 35415027 Free PMC article.

KMEL References

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/