Safety and efficacy of a single middle calyx access (MCA) in mini-PCNL
Affiliations
Affiliations
- Department of Urology, Vayodha Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal.
- Urology Unit, AL-Amiri Hospital, Gulf road, Sharq, Kuwait, Kuwait. ar_el_nahas@yahoo.com.
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation, Birmingham, UK.
- Urology Unit, AL-Amiri Hospital, Gulf road, Sharq, Kuwait, Kuwait.
To compare outcomes of a single middle calyx access (MCA) with a single upper or lower calyceal access in mini-PCNL. From May 2015 through August 2018, patients' files who underwent a single renal access mini-PCNL were retrospectively reviewed. All patients underwent fluoroscopic-guided access (16-20 F) in the prone position. They were categorized into group 1 (MCA) and group 2 (either upper or lower calyceal access). Compared preoperative items included stone location, size, number and complexity (according to Guy's score). The compared outcome parameters were complication and stone-free rates. The study comprised 512 consecutive patients, 374 patients in group 1 and 138 in group 2. A single MCA was utilized to access 95% of proximal ureteral calculi, 89% for ureteropelvic junction stones, and 84% for stones present in the pelvicalyceal system and ureter. MCA was used in 89% of complete staghorn stones and 73% of multiple stones. the Stone-free rates (93% vs 90.6%, P = 0.350) and the complications rates (8% vs 7.2%, P = 0.772) were comparable between group 1 and 2 despite that MCA was used for most cases with complex stones. Complications severity were also comparable (P = 0.579). Mini-PCNL performed through a single MCA is effective and safe. This access can be used for the treatment of renal and upper ureteral calculi of different complexities and locations.
Keywords: Middle calyx; Mini-PCNL; Mini-PERC; Renal stones.
Similar articles
Shabana W, Oquendo F, Hodhod A, Ahmad A, Alaref A, Trigo S, Hadi RA, Nour HH, Kotb A, Shahrour W, Elmansy H.Urology. 2021 Oct;156:65-70. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2021.05.041. Epub 2021 Jun 17.PMID: 34097943
Caglayan V, Onen E, Avci S, Kilic M, Sambel M, Oner S.Urol Int. 2020;104(9-10):741-745. doi: 10.1159/000505081. Epub 2020 Jan 21.PMID: 31962339
Yan MY, Lin J, Chiang HC, Chen YL, Chen PH.BMC Urol. 2018 Dec 11;18(1):112. doi: 10.1186/s12894-018-0429-1.PMID: 30537966 Free PMC article.
Mini Percutaneous Kidney Stone Removal: Applicable Technologies.
Desai J, Shah HN.Urol Clin North Am. 2022 Feb;49(1):161-173. doi: 10.1016/j.ucl.2021.08.003. Epub 2021 Oct 25.PMID: 34776049 Review.
Gao XS, Liao BH, Chen YT, Feng SJ, Gao R, Luo DY, Liu JM, Wang KJ.J Endourol. 2017 Nov;31(11):1101-1110. doi: 10.1089/end.2017.0547. Epub 2017 Oct 30.PMID: 28950716 Review.
Cited by
Liu YY, Chen YT, Luo HL, Shen YC, Chen CH, Chuang YC, Huang KW, Wang HJ.J Clin Med. 2022 Nov 9;11(22):6644. doi: 10.3390/jcm11226644.PMID: 36431120 Free PMC article.
Guo Y, Yang L, Xu X, Li C.Pak J Med Sci. 2022 Sep-Oct;38(7):1844-1851. doi: 10.12669/pjms.38.7.5526.PMID: 36246701 Free PMC article.
Comparison of standard- and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy for staghorn stones.
Khadgi S, El-Nahas AR, El-Shazly M, Al-Terki A.Arab J Urol. 2021 Jan 21;19(2):147-151. doi: 10.1080/2090598X.2021.1878670.PMID: 34104489 Free PMC article.
Tubeless mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal stones larger than 20 mm.
Khadgi S, Darrad M, El-Nahas AR, Al-Terki A.Indian J Urol. 2021 Jan-Mar;37(1):54-58. doi: 10.4103/iju.IJU_271_20. Epub 2021 Jan 1.PMID: 33850356 Free PMC article.