Methylene blue-guided retroperitoneoscopy technique: alternative for percutaneous nephrolithotomy in cases with renal access failure

Year 2022, Volume: 17 Issue: 3, 173 - 179, 27.10.2022

Serdar Karadağ , Mithat Ekşi

https://doi.org/10.33719/yud.2022;17-3-1114575

Abstract

Objective: To present our ‘methylene blue-guided retroperitoneoscopy technique’ that we apply in cases where extravasation develops for various reasons and is complicated as a result in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy surgery (PNL).
Material and Methods: A total of 36 patients, who underwent PNL with the ‘methylene blue technique’ at Bakirkoy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital between 2014 and 2020, were retrospectively evaluated. The study included only cases in which the ‘methylene blue-guided retroperitoneoscopy technique’ was used due to the inability to advance the Amplatz sheath to the targeted calyx due to renal scarring or a staghorn stone filling the targeted calyx, Amplatz sheath was withdrawn from the kidney with the guidewire due to the inattention of the assistant surgical team or contrast material extravasation. The patients’ demographic, preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative data were recorded, and stone-free and complication rates were noted.
Results: The mean age of the patients was 45.1 (36-55) years, the mean body mass index was 27.8±4 kg/m2, the mean stone size was 3.4±0.7 cm, and the mean stone volume was 22.3±10.2 cm3. The mean operation time was calculated as 95.8±30.3 minutes. The stone-free rate was 68% on the postoperative first day and 75% on the third month. Eight patients (22.2%) underwent a secondary procedure (extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy or flexible ureterorenoscopy).
Conclusion: The ‘methylene blue-guided retroperitoneoscopy technique’ we apply under retroperitoneoscopic direct vision is a safe and practical option for re-accessing the kidney by locating the calyx, which is first partially or completely dilated.

Keywords

methylene blue , retroperitoneoscopy , renal access failure , percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Metilen mavisi retroperitonoskopi tekniği: renal akses sağlanamayan perkütan nefrolitotomi vakalarında alternatif

Abstract

Amaç: Perkütan Nefrolitotomi cerrahisinde (PNL) çeşitli sebeplerle ekstravazasyon gelişen ve neticesinde komplike olan vakalarda uyguladığımız ‘Metilen Mavisi Eşliğinde Retroperitonoskopi Tekniği’’ni sunmak.
Gereç ve Yöntemler: 2014-2020 yılları arasında Bakırköy Dr. Sadi Konuk SUAM’da ‘Metilen Mavisi Tekniği’ uygulanarak yapılan 36 PNL vakası retrospektif olarak değerlendirildi. Renal skar ya da tüm kaliksi dolduran staghorn kalkül sebebiyle Amplatz kılıfının ilerletilemediği, Amplatz kılıfın yardımcı ekip tarafından dikkatsizlik sonucunda rehber tel ile birlikte çekildiği ve ekstravazasyon gelişen durumlarda “Metilen Mavisi” yöntemi kullanılan olgular çalışmaya dahil edildi. Hastalara ait demografik, preoperatif, perioperatif ve postoperatif verileri kaydedildi, taşsızlık ve komplikasyon oranları belirtildi.
Bulgular: Hastaların ortalama yaşı 45,1 yıl (36-55), ortalama vücut kitle indeksi 27,8 ± 4 kg/m2, ortalama taş boyutu 3,4 ± 0,7 cm, taş volümü 22,3 ± 10,2 cm3 idi. Ortalama operasyon süresi 95,8 ± 30,3 dk olarak hesaplandı. Postoperatif 1. gün taşsızlık oranı %68, 3. Ayda %75 idi. 8 hastaya (%22,2) ikincil bir prosedür uygulandı (ekstrakorporeal şok dalga litotripsi (ESWL) veya fleksible üreterorenoskopi (F-URS)).
Sonuç: Uyguladığımız ‘Metilen mavisi tekniği’ retroperitonoskopik direkt görüş altında daha önce kısmen veya tamamen dilatasyon sağlananan kaliksi bularak böbreğe tekrar akses sağlanması için güvenli ve pratik bir seçenektir.

Keywords

metilen mavisi , retroperitonoskopi , renal akses başarısızlığı , perkütan nefrolitotomi

References

• Fernstrom I, Johansson B. Percutaneous pyelolithotomy. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1976; 10(3):257–9. DOI: 10.1080/21681805.1976.11882084.
• Peng P-X, Lai S-C, Seery S, He Y-H, Zhao H, Wang X-M, et al. Balloon versus Amplatz for tract dilation in fluoroscopically guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2020; 10(7):035943. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035943.
• Giannakopoulos S, Bantis A, Kalaitzis C, Touloupidis S. Use of an angiographic catheter to facilitate fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous renal access in cases with diffuse contrast extravasation. J Endourol. 2010; 24(10):1575–8. DOI: 10.1089/end.2010.0019.
• Tiselius H-G, Andersson A. Stone burden in an average Swedish population of stone formers requiring active stone removal: how can the stone size be estimated in the clinical routine? Eur Urol. 2003; 43(3):275–81. DOI: 10.1016/s0302-2838(03)00006-x.
• Thomas K, Smith NC, Hegarty N, Glass JM. The Guy’s stone score--grading the complexity of percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures. Urology. 2011; 78(2):277–81. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2010.12.026.
• Tefekli A, Ali Karadag M, Tepeler K, Sari E, Berberoglu Y, Baykal M, et al. Classification of percutaneous nephrolithotomy complications using the modified clavien grading system: looking for a standard. Eur Urol. 2008; 53(1):184–90. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.06.049.
• Kim SC, Kuo RL, Lingeman JE. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: an update. Curr Opin Urol. 2003; 13(3):235–41. DOI: 10.1097/00042307-200305000-00012.
• Desai M. Ultrasonography-guided punctures-with and without puncture guide. J Endourol. 2009; 23(10):1641–3. DOI: 10.1089/end.2009.1530.
• Kyriazis I, Panagopoulos V, Kallidonis P, Özsoy M, Vasilas M, Liatsikos E. Complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. World J Urol. 2015; 33(8):1069–77. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-014-1400-8.
• Türk C, Neisius A, Petřík A, Seitz C, Thomas K, Skolarikos A. EAU Guidelines on Urolithiasis 2020. Available at https://d56bochluxqnz.cloudfront.net/documents/full-guideline/EAU-Guidelines-on-Urolithiasis-2022_2022-03-24-142444_crip.pdf.
• Miller NL, Matlaga BR, Lingeman JE. Techniques for Fluoroscopic Percutaneous Renal Access. Journal of Urology. 2007; 178:15–23. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.03.014.
• Khan F, Borin JF, Pearle MS, McDougall EM, Clayman R V. Endoscopically guided percutaneous renal access: “seeing is believing”. J Endourol. 2006; 20(7):451–5; discussion 455. DOI: 10.1089/end.2006.20.451. Grasso M, Lang G, Taylor FC. Flexible ureteroscopically assisted percutaneous renal access. Tech Urol. 1995; 1(1):39–43. PMID: 9118366.
• He X-B, Liu Y-Y, Huang G-M, Du D. The Clinical Application of Puncture Frame in Establishing Ultrasound Guided Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Access. Urol J. 2020; 17(4):358–62. DOI: 10.22037/uj.v0i0.5587. Arafa MA, Rabah DM. Study of quality of life and its determinants in patients after urinary stone fragmentation. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010; 8:119. DOI: 10.1186/1477-7525-8-119.
• Gadzhiev N, Brovkin S, Grigoryev V, Dmitriev V, Baketin P, Obidnyak V, et al. Are we ready to predict percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) stone-free failure? J Clin Urol [Internet]. 2016; 9(1):11–8. DOI: 10.1177/2051415815584505.
• Dawaba MS, Shokeir AA, Hafez AT, Shoma AM, El-Sherbiny MT, Mokhtar A, et al. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children: early and late anatomical and functional results. J Urol. 2004; 172(3):1078–81. DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000134889.99329.f7.