Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Do Patients Benefit from Miniaturized Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy? A Comparative Prospective Study

2010; Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.; Volume: 24; Issue: 7 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1089/end.2010.0111

1557-900X

Thomas Knoll, Felix Wezel, Maurice Stephan Michel, Patrick Honeck, Gunnar Wendt‐Nordahl,

Paleopathology and ancient diseases

Background and Purpose: A benefit of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) compared with conventional percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) has not been demonstrated as yet. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of conventional vs MPCNL and to determine if MPCNL offers an advantage for the patient. Patients and Methods: A prospective, nonrandomized series of 50 consecutive patients with solitary calculi (lower pole or the renal pelvis) were treated either by conventional PCNL (26F) or MPCNL (18F). Ultrasound or holmium laser were used for lithotripsy. Patients were treated tubeless after uncomplicated MPCNL, with thrombin-matrix tract closure and antegrade Double-J catheter placement. After PCNL, all patients received 22F nephrostomies. Demographic data, stone characteristics, perioperative course, and complication rates were assessed. Results: Patients characteristics were comparable in both groups, except for stone size, which was 18 ± 8 mm (MPCNL) and 23 ± 9 (PCNL; P = 0.042). Operative time was comparable in both groups (48 ± 17 vs 57 ± 22 min, not significant [NS]). After MPCNL, 96% were stone free at day 1 vs 92% after PCNL (NS). Significant complications did not occur in both groups. Minor complications were: Fever, 12% (MPCNL) vs 20% (PCNL; NS); bleeding, 4% vs 8%; perforations, 0% vs 4% (all NS). Overall outcome was not influenced by body mass index. Calcium oxalate stones were predominant with 75%. Patients after tubeless MPCNL had less pain (visual analogue score, 3 ± 3 vs 4 ± 3; P = 0.048.) and needed slightly less additional pain medication (25 ± 12 mg/d vs 37 ± 10 mg/d piritramid; NS). Hospital stay was significantly shorter after MPCNL (3.8 ± 28 vs 6.9 ± 3.5 d; P = 0.021.). Conclusions: Both techniques were safe and effective for the management of renal calculi. While stone-free rates were comparable in our series, MPCNL showed advantages in terms of shorter hospital stay and postoperative pain. The lower stone burden and the tubeless fashion of MPCNL, however, might have influenced these results.