Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11434/1137
Title: Mini PCNL for renal calculi: does size matter?
Epworth Authors: Troy, Andrew
Webb, David
Other Authors: Hennessey, Derek
Kinnear, Ned
Angus, David
Bolton, Damien
Keywords: MIP
PCNL
Mini-PCNL
Minimally Invasive PCNL
Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
mPCNL
cPCNL
Conventional PCNL
Kidney Calculi
Surgery
Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy System
Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures
Methods
Postoperative Complications
Treatment Outcome
Epworth Freemasons Hospital , Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
UroRenal, Vascular Clinical Institute, Epworth HealthCare, Victoria, Australia
Issue Date: May-2017
Publisher: Wiley
Citation: BJU Int. 2017 May;119 Suppl 5:39-46
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MIP) system for renal calculi. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) procedures with the MIP system were enrolled. Patient position, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, puncture location, stone clearance, postoperative drainage and complications were recorded, and features unique to MIP were noted. RESULTS: In all, 30 patients underwent 32 mPCNL procedures. The mean stone size was 17 (10.75-21.25) mm and the mean number of stones was 1 (1-2). The median stone clearance rate was 96.5 (95-100)%. The complication rate was 9.3%. No patient required a transfusion. In addition to these outcomes, we noted that the MIP system has many advantages over conventional PCNL (cPCNL). It is easy to learn and can be performed in both supine and prone positions. It is safe for supracostal puncture, provides excellent access to nearly all calyces and upper ureter, has multiple stone treatment options, can be used as an adjunct to cPCNL, and can be performed as a tubeless procedure. CONCLUSION: Our experience with the MIP system has shown several advantages over cPCNL. mPCNL with the MIP system has several features that suggest it should be considered as an alternative or adjunct to cPCNL, ureteroscopy and extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11434/1137
DOI: 10.1111/bju.13839
PubMed URL: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28544299
ISSN: 1464-410X
1464-4096
Journal Title: BJU International
Type: Journal Article
Affiliated Organisations: Department of Urology, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Vic., Australia.
Warringal Private Hospital, Heidelberg, Vic., Australia.
Type of Clinical Study or Trial: Prospective Study
Appears in Collections:UroRenal, Vascular

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in EKB are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.