Optimizing stone harvesting in miniaturized-PCNL: a critical examination of renal access angles, technology, and the role they play in operative efficiency
Tóm tắt
Stone retrieval can be a laborious aspect of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). A unique phenomenon of mini-PCNL is the vortex-effect (VE), a hydrodynamic form of stone retrieval. Additionally, the vacuum‐assisted sheath (VAS) was recently developed as a new tool for stone extraction. The purpose of our study is to investigate the impact of renal access angle (as a surrogate for patient positioning) on stone retrieval efficiency and compare the efficiency among methods of stone retrieval. A kidney model was filled with 3 mm artificial stones. Access to the mid‐calyx was obtained using a 15Fr sheath. Stones were retrieved over three minutes at angles of 0°, 25°, and 75° utilizing the VE, VAS, and basket. Stones were weighed for comparison of stones/retraction and stones/minute. Trials were repeated three times at each angle. Renal access angle of 0° was associated with increased stone retrieval for both the VE and VAS (p < 0.05). The VE was the most effective method for stones retrieved per individual retraction at an angle of 0° (p < 0.005), although when analyzed as stones retrieved per minute, the VE and VAS were no longer statistically different (p = 0.08). At 75°, none of the methods were statistically different, regardless if analyzed as stones per retraction or per minute (p = 0.20‐0.40). Renal access angle of 0° is more efficient for stone retrieval than a steep upward angle. There is no difference in stone retrieval efficiency between the VE and VAS methods, although both are superior to the basket at lower sheath angles.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Scales CD Jr, AlexandriaSmith C, Hanley JM, Saigal CS (2012) Urologic diseases in America, prevalence of kidney stones in the United States. Eur Urol. 62(1):160–165
Assimos D, Krambeck A, Miller NL, Monga M, Murad MH, Nelson CP, Pace KT, Pais VM Jr, Pearle MS, Preminger GM, Razvi H, Shah O, Matlaga BR (2016) Surgical management of stones: American urological association/endourological society guideline. Part I J Urol 196(4):1153–1160
Turk C, Petrik A, Sarica K, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, Straub M, Knoll T (2016) EAU guidelines on interventional treatment for urolithiasis. Eur Urol 69(3):475–482
Jackman SV, Hedican SP, Docimo SG, Peters CA (1997) Miniaturized access for pediatric percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 11(S133):P7–P4
Thapa BB, Niranjan V (2020) Mini PCNL over standard PCNL: what makes it better? Surg J 6(1):e19–e23
Wright A, Rukin N, Smith D, De la Rosette J, Somani BK (2016) ’Mini, ultra, micro’—nomenclature and cost of these new minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) techniques. Ther Adv Urol 8(2):142–146
Ahmad AA, Alhunaidi O, Aziz M, Omar M, Al-Kandari AM, El-Nahas A, El-Shazly M (2017) Current trends in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: an internet-based survey. Ther Adv Urol 9(9–10):219–226
Nagele U, Horstmann M, Sievert KD, Kuczyk MA, Walcher U, Hennenlotter J, Stenzl A, Anastasiadis AG (2007) A newly designed amplatz sheath decreases intrapelvic irrigation pressure during mini-percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy: an in-vitro pressure-measurement and microscopic study. J Endourol 21(9):1113–1116
Mager R, Balzereit C, Gust K, Husch T, Herrmann T, Nagele U, Haferkamp A, Schilling D (2016) The hydrodynamic basis of the vacuum cleaner effect in continuous-flow PCNL instruments: an empiric approach and mathematical model. World J Urol 34(5):717–724
Nicklas AP, Schilling D, Bader MJ, Herrmann TR, Nagele U, Training, S. Research in Urological, and G. Technology (2015) The vacuum cleaner effect in minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy. World J Urol 33(11):1847–1853
Lai D, Chen M, Sheng M, Liu Y, Xu G, He Y, Li X (2020) Use of a novel vacuum-assisted access sheath in minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a feasibility study. J Endourol 34(3):339–344
Lievore E, Boeri L, Zanetti SP, Fulgheri I, Fontana M, Turetti M, Bebi C, Botticelli F, Gallioli A, Longo F, Brambilla R, Campoleoni M, De Lorenzis E, Montanari E, Albo G (2021) Clinical comparison of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy with vacuum cleaner effect or with a vacuum-assisted access sheath: a single-center experience. J Endourol 35(5):601–608
Ozdemir H, Erbin A, Sahan M, Savun M, Cubuk A, Yazici O, Akbulut MF, Sarilar O (2019) Comparison of supine and prone miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of lower pole, middle pole and renal pelvic stones: A matched pair analysis. Int Braz J Urol 45(5):956–964
Batchelor GK (2000) An introduction to fluid dynamics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Gadzhiev N, Sergei B, Grigoryev V, Okhunov Z, Ganpule A, Pisarev A, Iskakov Y, Petrov S (2017) Evaluation of the effect of Bernoulli maneuver on operative time during mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a prospective randomized study. Investig Clin Urol 58(3):179–185
Perrella RT et al (2022) Impact of the patient positioning on intrarenal pressure during percutaneous nephrolithotomy—a prospective randomized trial World Congress of Endourology 2022. Mary Ann Liebert Inc, San Diego, pp A1–A315
Li J, Gao L, Li Q, Zhang Y, Jiang Q (2019) Supine versus prone position for percutaneous nephrolithotripsy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Surg 66:62–71
Zhu W, Liu Y, Liu L, Lei M, Yuan J, Wan SP, Zeng G (2015) Minimally invasive versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis. Urolithiasis 43(6):563–570
Zhu Z, Cui Y, Zeng H, Li Y, Zeng F, Li Y, Chen Z, Hequn C (2020) The evaluation of early predictive factors for urosepsis in patients with negative preoperative urine culture following mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy. World J Urol 38(10):2629–2636
Kreydin EI, Eisner BH (2013) Risk factors for sepsis after percutaneous renal stone surgery. Nat Rev Urol 10(10):598–605
Fan J, Wan S, Liu L, Zhao Z, Mai Z, Chen D, Zhu W, Yang Z, Ou L, Wu W (2017) Predictors for uroseptic shock in patients who undergo minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Urolithiasis 45(6):573–578