» Articles » PMID: 26019942

Multislice Computed Tomography Vs. Intravenous Urography for Planning Supine Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Randomised Clinical Trial

Overview
Journal Arab J Urol
Date 2015 May 29
PMID 26019942
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To compare the outcome of treatment planning using multislice computed tomography (CT) or intravenous urography (IVU) for supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).

Patients And Methods: The study included 60 patients with renal stones, all treated by supine PCNL, between March 2011 and October 2012. The patients were divided randomly into two equal groups; in group 1 30 patients had the PCNL access planned based on IVU findings, and in group 2 the PCNL access was planned based on multislice CT images. All patients were suitable for PCNL, based on a plain abdominal film and ultrasonography, and with a body mass index of <30 kg/m(2). The exclusion criteria were renal anomalies and bleeding diathesis. All data from both groups for the mean time taken to gain percutaneous access, operative duration, fluoroscopic time, access difficulty, stone-free rate and intraoperative morbidity were collected and analysed statistically.

Results: The mean (SD) time taken to gain percutaneous access was longer in group 1 than group 2, at 22.2 (1.76) vs. 13.1 (1.62) min (P < 0.001), as were the operative duration, at 81.9 (14.9) vs. 58.8 (7.6) min (P < 0.001), and fluoroscopic time, at 3.5 (1.7) vs. 2.2 (1.3) min (P = 0.002). In group 1 there were four cases (13%) in which there were difficulties in establishing percutaneous access, while in group 2 there were none (P = 0.003). There was intraoperative morbidity in three patients (10%) in group 1 and two (7%) in group 2.

Conclusion: Multislice CT is a safer, more accurate and noninvasive imaging technique than IVU for mapping the pelvicalyceal system. It saves time and is essential in choosing the optimal percutaneous access into the pelvicalyceal system for a safe and successful PCNL.

Citing Articles

Assessment of Three-Dimensional Reconstruction in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Complex Renal Calculi Treatment.

Tan H, Xie Y, Zhang X, Wang W, Yuan H, Lin C Front Surg. 2021; 8:701207.

PMID: 34746220 PMC: 8564007. DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.701207.


Trends of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in Saudi Arabia.

Kamal W, Alhazmy A, Alharthi M, Al Solumany A Urol Ann. 2021; 12(4):352-359.

PMID: 33776332 PMC: 7992526. DOI: 10.4103/UA.UA_100_19.

References
1.
Ghani K, Patel U, Anson K . Computed tomography for percutaneous renal access. J Endourol. 2009; 23(10):1633-9. DOI: 10.1089/end.2009.1529. View

2.
Ganpule A, Desai M . What's new in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Arab J Urol. 2015; 10(3):317-23. PMC: 4442968. DOI: 10.1016/j.aju.2012.07.005. View

3.
Rana A, Bhojwani J, Junejo N, Das Bhagia S . Tubeless PCNL with patient in supine position: procedure for all seasons?--with comprehensive technique. Urology. 2008; 71(4):581-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.10.059. View

4.
Falahatkar S, Farzan A, Allahkhah A . Is complete supine percutaneous nephrolithotripsy feasible in all patients?. Urol Res. 2010; 39(2):99-104. DOI: 10.1007/s00240-010-0287-0. View

5.
Bilen C, Kocak B, Kitirci G, Danaci M, Sarikaya S . Simple trigonometry on computed tomography helps in planning renal access. Urology. 2007; 70(2):242-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.03.079. View