Düşük sayılı serimizde Perkütan Nefrolitotomi’de başarı ve komplikasyonlarımız

Year 2013, Volume: 8 Issue: 2, 54 - 59, 01.05.2013

Hakan Erçil Ferhat Ortoğlu Faruk Kuyucu Güçlü Gürlen Umut Ünal Zafer Gökhan Gürbüz

Abstract

Amaç Böbrek taşı tedavisinde Perkütan Nefrolitotomi tedavisinin etkinlik ve güvenilirliğini araştırmak üzere deneyimlerimizi geriye dönük olarak değerlendirdik.Gereç ve Yöntemler: Mart 2011 ile Kasım 2012 tarihleri arasında, toplamda 113 hastada 66 erkek, 47 kadın 116 renal üniteye pron pozisyonda PCNL yapıldı. Hastaların demografik özellikleri, böbrek taşlarının boyut ve yerleşimi, işlem süresi, renal sisteme giriş yöntemleri, peri- veya post-operatif komplikasyonlar, transfüzyon gereksinimi, taştan temizlenme oranı geriye dönük olarak değerlendirildi.Bulgular: Hastaların ortalama yaşı caly insignificant residuel fragments rate were 69.01% and 6.19%, respectively. Overall sto42,83±15.66 idi. Ortalama operasyon süresi 189 dk 35 -210 dk idi. Ortalama taş yükü 5,2 218 cm² idi. Taştan tam temizlenme %69,01, klinik önemsiz rezidüel fragman oranı % 6,19 idi. Tüm hastalarda taşsızlık oranı Taştan tam temizlenme + Klinik önemsiz residüel fragman %75,2 idi. Toplam 10 hastada %8,84 transfüzyon gerektiren kanama gözlendi. Belirgin rezidüel taşı kalan ve uzamış drenajı olan toplan 15 hastaya %13,2 JJ stent tatbik edildi. İki hastada kolon perforasyonu, 1 hastada AV fistül ve 1 hastada ise geç dönemde üreter taşına bağlı ürinom gelişti.Sonuç: Düşük sayılı gruplarda da, PCNL etkin ve güvenilir bir yöntemdir

Keywords

Perkütan Nefrolitotomi , Böbrek Taşı

Effectiveness and complications of Perkütan Nefrolitotomi in our low volume series

Abstract

series for effectiviness and safety of Perkütan Nefrolitotomi treatment of renal stones in low volume group. Patients and Methods: Between March 2011 to November 2012, 47 female and 66 male,totaly 113 patients who had 116 PCNL procedures were retrospectively evaluated. These patients were evaluated for demographic features, complications, blood loss, blood transfusion requirement and stone free rates. Results: Average age of the patients was 42.83±15.66. Average operation time was 189 min. 35 -210 min .Stone free rate and clinicaly insignificant residuel fragments rate were 69.01% and 6.19%, respectively. Overall stone free rates was 75,2%. Avarage stone area was 5.2 cm² 2-18 cm² . The blood transfusion rate was 8,84% 10 patients . JJ stent insertion was performed in 15 patients 13.2% for residuel stones or prolonged urinary drainage from nephrostomy site. Colon perforation in 2 patient , AV fistula in one patient and urinoma due to ureteral stone in one patient were observed as complications.

Keywords

Percutane Nephrolithotomy , Renal Stones

References

• Fernstrom I, Johansson B. Percutaneous pyelolitho- tomy. A new extraction technique.Scand J Urol Nephrol 1976;10:257-59.
• Türk C , Knoll T, Petrik A, Sarica K, Straub M, Seitz C. Guidelines on Urolithiasis European Association of Uro- logy 2012.
• Segura JW, Patterson DE, LeRoy AJ: Percutaneous re- moval of kidney stones. Review of 1000 cases. J Urol 1985;134:1077-81.
• Hasun R, Ryan PC, Marberger M. Percutaneous coagulum nephrolithotripsy: a newapproach. Br J Urol. 1985;57:605- 09.
• Goldwasser B, John L, Carson C, et al. Factors effecting the success rate of percutaneous nephrolithotripsy and the inci- dence of retained fragments. J Urol 1986;136:358–60.
• Michaels EK, Fowler JE Jr , Manino M. Bacteriuria follo- wing ESWL of infected stones. J Urol 1988;140: 254-56.
• Opondo D, Tefekli A, Esen T, Labate G, Sangam K, De Lisa A,Shah H,de la Rosette J. Impact of case volumes on the outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 2012;62:1181-87.
• Armitage JN, Irving SO, Burgess NA. British association of urological surgeons section of endourology: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the United kingdom: results of a pros- pective data registry 2012;61:1188-93.
• Al-Kohlany KM, Shokeir AA, Mosbah A, et all. Treatment of complete staghorn stones:A prospective randomized comparison of open surgery versus percutaneous nephro- lithotomy. J Urol 2005;173:469-73.
• Agrawal MS, Agrawal M, Gupta A, Bansal S, Yadav A, Go- yal JA . Randomized comparison of tubeless and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 2008;22:439-42.
• Lingeman JE, Lifshitz DA. Surgical management of urinary lithiasis. Campbell‘s Urology P.C. Walsh Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company;2007. p. 1431-1507.
• Preminger GM, Assimos DG, Lingeman JE, Nakada SY, Pe- arle MS, Wolf JS JR. Chapter 1 AUA guideline on manage- ment of staghorn calculi: diagnosis and treatment recom- mendations. J Urol 2005;173:1991-00.
• Schiling D, Gakis G, Walcher U, Stenzl A, Nagele U. The le- arning curve in minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolit- holapaxy: a 1-year retrospective evaluation of a novice and an expert. World J Urol 2011;29:749-53.
• Akman T, Binbay M, Sarı E, et all. Factors affecting blee- ding during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: single surgeon experience. J Endourol 2011;25:327-33.
• Kukreja R, Desai M, Patel S, Bapat S, Desai M. Factors af- fecting blood loss during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: prospective study. J Endourol 2004;18:715-22.
• Davidoff R, Bellman GC. Influence in technique of percu- taneous tract creation on incidence of renal hemorrhage. J Urol 1997;157:1229-34.
• Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of sur- gical complications: A new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 2004;240:205-13.
• Tefekli A, Karadağ MA, Tepeler K., et al. Classification of percutaneous nephrolithotomy complications using the modified clavien grading system: looking for a standard. Eur Urol 2008;53:184-90.
• Palmero JL,Nuno de la Rosa I, Miralles J. Amoros A,Pator JC,Benedicto A. Study of Predictive Factors for Complicati- ons After Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy According to the Clavien Classification. Actas Urol Esp 2013 Feb 15. doi:pii: S0210-4806(12)00389-0. 10.1016/j.acuro.2012.11.006.