Complete supine PCNL: ultrasound vs. fluoroscopic guided: a randomized clinical trial
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2016 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , |
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=S1677-55382016000400710 |
Resumo: | ABSTRACT Introduction and Hypothesis: To compare complications and outcomes of complete supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy (csPCNL) with ultrasound guided and fluoroscopically guided procedure. Materials and Methods: In this randomized clinical trial study from January 2009 to September 2010, 26 of 51 patients with renal stones underwent csPCNL with ultrasonographic guidance in all steps of the procedure (group A), and the other 25 patients underwent standard fluoroscopically guided csPCNL (group B). All of the patients underwent PCNL in the complete supine position. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS16 software. Results: Mean BMI was 28.14 in group A and 26.31 in group B (p=0.30). The mean stone burden was 26.48 and 30.44 in groups A and B, respectively (p=0.20). The stone free rate was 88.5% in group A and 75.5% in group B, that was no significant (p=0.16). Overall 2 patients (7.7%) in group A and 6 patients (24%) in group B had complications (p=0.11). Mean operative time in group A was 88.46 minutes, and in group B it was 79.58 minutes (p=0.39). Mean hospital stay was 69.70 and 61.79 hours in group A and B, respectively (p=0.22). There was no visceral injury in groups. Conclusions: This randomized study showed that totally ultrasonic had the same outcomes of fluoroscopically csPCNL. Ultrasonography can be an alternative rather than fluoroscopy in PCNL. We believe that more randomized studies are needed to allow endourologists to use sonography rather than fluoroscopy in order to avoid exposition to radiation. |
id |
SBU-1_a023f1ba5c72958e26cef4257a82d536 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S1677-55382016000400710 |
network_acronym_str |
SBU-1 |
network_name_str |
International Braz J Urol (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Complete supine PCNL: ultrasound vs. fluoroscopic guided: a randomized clinical trialNephrostomy, PercutaneousUltrasonographyFluoroscopySupine PositionABSTRACT Introduction and Hypothesis: To compare complications and outcomes of complete supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy (csPCNL) with ultrasound guided and fluoroscopically guided procedure. Materials and Methods: In this randomized clinical trial study from January 2009 to September 2010, 26 of 51 patients with renal stones underwent csPCNL with ultrasonographic guidance in all steps of the procedure (group A), and the other 25 patients underwent standard fluoroscopically guided csPCNL (group B). All of the patients underwent PCNL in the complete supine position. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS16 software. Results: Mean BMI was 28.14 in group A and 26.31 in group B (p=0.30). The mean stone burden was 26.48 and 30.44 in groups A and B, respectively (p=0.20). The stone free rate was 88.5% in group A and 75.5% in group B, that was no significant (p=0.16). Overall 2 patients (7.7%) in group A and 6 patients (24%) in group B had complications (p=0.11). Mean operative time in group A was 88.46 minutes, and in group B it was 79.58 minutes (p=0.39). Mean hospital stay was 69.70 and 61.79 hours in group A and B, respectively (p=0.22). There was no visceral injury in groups. Conclusions: This randomized study showed that totally ultrasonic had the same outcomes of fluoroscopically csPCNL. Ultrasonography can be an alternative rather than fluoroscopy in PCNL. We believe that more randomized studies are needed to allow endourologists to use sonography rather than fluoroscopy in order to avoid exposition to radiation.Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia2016-08-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382016000400710International braz j urol v.42 n.4 2016reponame:International Braz J Urol (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)instacron:SBU10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2014.0291info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessFalahatkar,SiavashAllahkhah,AliakbarKazemzadeh,MajidEnshaei,AhmadShakiba,MaryamMoghaddas,Fahimeheng2016-09-06T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1677-55382016000400710Revistahttp://www.brazjurol.com.br/ONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||brazjurol@brazjurol.com.br1677-61191677-5538opendoar:2016-09-06T00:00International Braz J Urol (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Complete supine PCNL: ultrasound vs. fluoroscopic guided: a randomized clinical trial |
title |
Complete supine PCNL: ultrasound vs. fluoroscopic guided: a randomized clinical trial |
spellingShingle |
Complete supine PCNL: ultrasound vs. fluoroscopic guided: a randomized clinical trial Falahatkar,Siavash Nephrostomy, Percutaneous Ultrasonography Fluoroscopy Supine Position |
title_short |
Complete supine PCNL: ultrasound vs. fluoroscopic guided: a randomized clinical trial |
title_full |
Complete supine PCNL: ultrasound vs. fluoroscopic guided: a randomized clinical trial |
title_fullStr |
Complete supine PCNL: ultrasound vs. fluoroscopic guided: a randomized clinical trial |
title_full_unstemmed |
Complete supine PCNL: ultrasound vs. fluoroscopic guided: a randomized clinical trial |
title_sort |
Complete supine PCNL: ultrasound vs. fluoroscopic guided: a randomized clinical trial |
author |
Falahatkar,Siavash |
author_facet |
Falahatkar,Siavash Allahkhah,Aliakbar Kazemzadeh,Majid Enshaei,Ahmad Shakiba,Maryam Moghaddas,Fahimeh |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Allahkhah,Aliakbar Kazemzadeh,Majid Enshaei,Ahmad Shakiba,Maryam Moghaddas,Fahimeh |
author2_role |
author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Falahatkar,Siavash Allahkhah,Aliakbar Kazemzadeh,Majid Enshaei,Ahmad Shakiba,Maryam Moghaddas,Fahimeh |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Nephrostomy, Percutaneous Ultrasonography Fluoroscopy Supine Position |
topic |
Nephrostomy, Percutaneous Ultrasonography Fluoroscopy Supine Position |
description |
ABSTRACT Introduction and Hypothesis: To compare complications and outcomes of complete supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy (csPCNL) with ultrasound guided and fluoroscopically guided procedure. Materials and Methods: In this randomized clinical trial study from January 2009 to September 2010, 26 of 51 patients with renal stones underwent csPCNL with ultrasonographic guidance in all steps of the procedure (group A), and the other 25 patients underwent standard fluoroscopically guided csPCNL (group B). All of the patients underwent PCNL in the complete supine position. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS16 software. Results: Mean BMI was 28.14 in group A and 26.31 in group B (p=0.30). The mean stone burden was 26.48 and 30.44 in groups A and B, respectively (p=0.20). The stone free rate was 88.5% in group A and 75.5% in group B, that was no significant (p=0.16). Overall 2 patients (7.7%) in group A and 6 patients (24%) in group B had complications (p=0.11). Mean operative time in group A was 88.46 minutes, and in group B it was 79.58 minutes (p=0.39). Mean hospital stay was 69.70 and 61.79 hours in group A and B, respectively (p=0.22). There was no visceral injury in groups. Conclusions: This randomized study showed that totally ultrasonic had the same outcomes of fluoroscopically csPCNL. Ultrasonography can be an alternative rather than fluoroscopy in PCNL. We believe that more randomized studies are needed to allow endourologists to use sonography rather than fluoroscopy in order to avoid exposition to radiation. |
publishDate |
2016 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2016-08-01 |
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=S1677-55382016000400710 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382016000400710 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2014.0291 |
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.42 n.4 2016 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_ |
1750318074977845248 |