TY - JOUR
T1 - Modified supine versus prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy
T2 - Surgical outcomes from a tertiary teaching hospital
AU - Jones, Madeleine Nina
AU - Ranasinghe, Weranja
AU - Cetti, Richard
AU - Newell, Bradley
AU - Chu, Kevin
AU - Harper, Matthew
AU - Kourambas, John
AU - McCahy, Philip
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Korean Urological Association, 2016.
Copyright:
Copyright 2017 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2016/7
Y1 - 2016/7
N2 - Purpose: The traditional prone positioning of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is associated with various anesthetic and logistic difficulties. We aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of PCNLs performed using our modified supine position with those performed in the standard prone position. Materials and Methods: A prospective group of 236 renal units (224 patients) undergoing PCNL were included in this 2 site study: 160 were performed in the modified supine position were compared with 76 undergoing PCNL in the prone position. The outcomes of radiation dose, radiation time, stone free rate, body mass index (BMI), stone size, operative time, length of stay (LOS), in hospital and complications were compared. Chi-square and t-tests were used. Results: There were no significant differences in mean radiation time, radiation dose or stone size between the modified supine and prone groups. The supine group had a higher mean BMI (31 kg/m 2 vs. 28 kg/m 2, p=0.03), shorter mean surgical time (93 minutes vs. 123 minutes, p<0.001), shorter mean LOS (2 days vs. 3 days, p=0.005) and higher stone free rate (70% vs. 50%, p=0.005). There were no differences in septic or bleeding complications but the prone group had a higher rate of overall complications. Conclusions: Modified supine PCNL has significantly lower operative time, shorter LOS and higher stone-free rate compared with prone in our series, while remaining a safe procedure.
AB - Purpose: The traditional prone positioning of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is associated with various anesthetic and logistic difficulties. We aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of PCNLs performed using our modified supine position with those performed in the standard prone position. Materials and Methods: A prospective group of 236 renal units (224 patients) undergoing PCNL were included in this 2 site study: 160 were performed in the modified supine position were compared with 76 undergoing PCNL in the prone position. The outcomes of radiation dose, radiation time, stone free rate, body mass index (BMI), stone size, operative time, length of stay (LOS), in hospital and complications were compared. Chi-square and t-tests were used. Results: There were no significant differences in mean radiation time, radiation dose or stone size between the modified supine and prone groups. The supine group had a higher mean BMI (31 kg/m 2 vs. 28 kg/m 2, p=0.03), shorter mean surgical time (93 minutes vs. 123 minutes, p<0.001), shorter mean LOS (2 days vs. 3 days, p=0.005) and higher stone free rate (70% vs. 50%, p=0.005). There were no differences in septic or bleeding complications but the prone group had a higher rate of overall complications. Conclusions: Modified supine PCNL has significantly lower operative time, shorter LOS and higher stone-free rate compared with prone in our series, while remaining a safe procedure.
KW - Kidney calculi
KW - Percutaneous nephrostomy
KW - Prone position
KW - Supine position
KW - Treatment outcomes
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84978472280&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.4111/icu.2016.57.4.268
DO - 10.4111/icu.2016.57.4.268
M3 - Article
C2 - 27437536
AN - SCOPUS:84978472280
SN - 2466-0493
VL - 57
SP - 268
EP - 273
JO - Investigative and Clinical Urology
JF - Investigative and Clinical Urology
IS - 4
ER -