Impact of patient position on the outcomes of percutaneous neprolithotomy for complex kidney stones

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Vicentini,Fabio Carvalho
Data de Publicação: 2018
Outros Autores: Perrella,Rodrigo, Souza,Vinicius M. G., Hisano,Marcelo, Murta,Claudio Bovolenta, Claro,Joaquim Francisco de Almeida
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: International Braz J Urol (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382018000500965
Resumo: ABSTRACT Purpose: To evaluate the impact of the patient position on the outcomes of PCNL among patients with complex renal stones. Material and Methods: From July 2011 to July 2014, we collected prospective data of consecutive patients who underwent PCNL. We included all patients with complex stones (Guy's Stone Score 3 or 4 (GSS) based on a CT scan) and divided them based on the position used during PCNL (prone or supine). The variables analyzed were gender, age, body mass index, ASA score, stone diameter, GSS, number of punctures, calyx puncture site, intercostal access and patient positioning. Complications were graded according to the modified-Clavien Classification. Success was considered if fragments ≤ 4mm were observed on the first postoperative day CT scan. Results: We analyzed 240 (46.4%) of 517 PCNL performed during the study period that were classified as GGS 3-4. Regarding patient positions, 21.2% were prone and 79.8% were supine. Both groups were comparable, although intercostal access was more common in prone cases (25.5% vs 10.5%; p=0.01). The success rates, complications, blood transfusions and surgical times were similar for both groups; however, there were significantly more visceral injuries (10.3% vs 2.6%; p=0.046) and sepsis (7.8% vs 2.1%; p=0.042) in prone cases. Conclusion: Supine or prone position were equally suitable for PCNL with complex stones and did not impact the success rates. However, supine position was associated with fewer sepsis cases and visceral injuries.
id SBU-1_ece9da0eef1f500af12c3b847c92db04
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1677-55382018000500965
network_acronym_str SBU-1
network_name_str International Braz J Urol (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Impact of patient position on the outcomes of percutaneous neprolithotomy for complex kidney stonesKidney CalculiNephrolithotomyPercutaneousSupine PositionProne PositionABSTRACT Purpose: To evaluate the impact of the patient position on the outcomes of PCNL among patients with complex renal stones. Material and Methods: From July 2011 to July 2014, we collected prospective data of consecutive patients who underwent PCNL. We included all patients with complex stones (Guy's Stone Score 3 or 4 (GSS) based on a CT scan) and divided them based on the position used during PCNL (prone or supine). The variables analyzed were gender, age, body mass index, ASA score, stone diameter, GSS, number of punctures, calyx puncture site, intercostal access and patient positioning. Complications were graded according to the modified-Clavien Classification. Success was considered if fragments ≤ 4mm were observed on the first postoperative day CT scan. Results: We analyzed 240 (46.4%) of 517 PCNL performed during the study period that were classified as GGS 3-4. Regarding patient positions, 21.2% were prone and 79.8% were supine. Both groups were comparable, although intercostal access was more common in prone cases (25.5% vs 10.5%; p=0.01). The success rates, complications, blood transfusions and surgical times were similar for both groups; however, there were significantly more visceral injuries (10.3% vs 2.6%; p=0.046) and sepsis (7.8% vs 2.1%; p=0.042) in prone cases. Conclusion: Supine or prone position were equally suitable for PCNL with complex stones and did not impact the success rates. However, supine position was associated with fewer sepsis cases and visceral injuries.Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia2018-10-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382018000500965International braz j urol v.44 n.5 2018reponame:International Braz J Urol (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)instacron:SBU10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2018.0163info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessVicentini,Fabio CarvalhoPerrella,RodrigoSouza,Vinicius M. G.Hisano,MarceloMurta,Claudio BovolentaClaro,Joaquim Francisco de Almeidaeng2018-10-24T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1677-55382018000500965Revistahttp://www.brazjurol.com.br/ONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||brazjurol@brazjurol.com.br1677-61191677-5538opendoar:2018-10-24T00:00International Braz J Urol (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Impact of patient position on the outcomes of percutaneous neprolithotomy for complex kidney stones
title Impact of patient position on the outcomes of percutaneous neprolithotomy for complex kidney stones
spellingShingle Impact of patient position on the outcomes of percutaneous neprolithotomy for complex kidney stones
Vicentini,Fabio Carvalho
Kidney Calculi
Nephrolithotomy
Percutaneous
Supine Position
Prone Position
title_short Impact of patient position on the outcomes of percutaneous neprolithotomy for complex kidney stones
title_full Impact of patient position on the outcomes of percutaneous neprolithotomy for complex kidney stones
title_fullStr Impact of patient position on the outcomes of percutaneous neprolithotomy for complex kidney stones
title_full_unstemmed Impact of patient position on the outcomes of percutaneous neprolithotomy for complex kidney stones
title_sort Impact of patient position on the outcomes of percutaneous neprolithotomy for complex kidney stones
author Vicentini,Fabio Carvalho
author_facet Vicentini,Fabio Carvalho
Perrella,Rodrigo
Souza,Vinicius M. G.
Hisano,Marcelo
Murta,Claudio Bovolenta
Claro,Joaquim Francisco de Almeida
author_role author
author2 Perrella,Rodrigo
Souza,Vinicius M. G.
Hisano,Marcelo
Murta,Claudio Bovolenta
Claro,Joaquim Francisco de Almeida
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Vicentini,Fabio Carvalho
Perrella,Rodrigo
Souza,Vinicius M. G.
Hisano,Marcelo
Murta,Claudio Bovolenta
Claro,Joaquim Francisco de Almeida
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Kidney Calculi
Nephrolithotomy
Percutaneous
Supine Position
Prone Position
topic Kidney Calculi
Nephrolithotomy
Percutaneous
Supine Position
Prone Position
description ABSTRACT Purpose: To evaluate the impact of the patient position on the outcomes of PCNL among patients with complex renal stones. Material and Methods: From July 2011 to July 2014, we collected prospective data of consecutive patients who underwent PCNL. We included all patients with complex stones (Guy's Stone Score 3 or 4 (GSS) based on a CT scan) and divided them based on the position used during PCNL (prone or supine). The variables analyzed were gender, age, body mass index, ASA score, stone diameter, GSS, number of punctures, calyx puncture site, intercostal access and patient positioning. Complications were graded according to the modified-Clavien Classification. Success was considered if fragments ≤ 4mm were observed on the first postoperative day CT scan. Results: We analyzed 240 (46.4%) of 517 PCNL performed during the study period that were classified as GGS 3-4. Regarding patient positions, 21.2% were prone and 79.8% were supine. Both groups were comparable, although intercostal access was more common in prone cases (25.5% vs 10.5%; p=0.01). The success rates, complications, blood transfusions and surgical times were similar for both groups; however, there were significantly more visceral injuries (10.3% vs 2.6%; p=0.046) and sepsis (7.8% vs 2.1%; p=0.042) in prone cases. Conclusion: Supine or prone position were equally suitable for PCNL with complex stones and did not impact the success rates. However, supine position was associated with fewer sepsis cases and visceral injuries.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018-10-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382018000500965
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382018000500965
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2018.0163
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv International braz j urol v.44 n.5 2018
reponame:International Braz J Urol (Online)
instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)
instacron:SBU
instname_str Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)
instacron_str SBU
institution SBU
reponame_str International Braz J Urol (Online)
collection International Braz J Urol (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv International Braz J Urol (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||brazjurol@brazjurol.com.br
_version_ 1750318076335751168