Minimally invasive versus conventional large-bore percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of large-sized renal calculi: surgeon’s preference?

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MIP) and conventional percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in the treatment of patients with large renal stone burden. MIP has proven its efficacy and safety in the management o...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Abdelhafez, Mohamed (VerfasserIn) , Wendt-Nordahl, Gunnar (VerfasserIn)
Dokumenttyp: Article (Journal)
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: 24 March 2016
In: Scandinavian journal of urology
Year: 2016, Jahrgang: 50, Heft: 3, Pages: 212-215
ISSN:2168-1813
DOI:10.3109/21681805.2016.1155078
Online-Zugang:Verlag, Volltext: https://doi.org/10.3109/21681805.2016.1155078
Volltext
Verfasserangaben:Mohamed F. Abdelhafez, Gunnar Wendt-Nordahl, Stefan Kruck, Rene Mager, Arnulf Stenzl, Thomas Knoll and David Schilling

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a2200000 c 4500
001 1684882419
003 DE-627
005 20230427195859.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 191209s2016 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.3109/21681805.2016.1155078  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1684882419 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1684882419 
035 |a (OCoLC)1341280690 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 33  |2 sdnb 
100 1 |a Abdelhafez, Mohamed  |e VerfasserIn  |0 (DE-588)1050203984  |0 (DE-627)783629745  |0 (DE-576)404408885  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Minimally invasive versus conventional large-bore percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of large-sized renal calculi  |b surgeon’s preference?  |c Mohamed F. Abdelhafez, Gunnar Wendt-Nordahl, Stefan Kruck, Rene Mager, Arnulf Stenzl, Thomas Knoll and David Schilling 
264 1 |c 24 March 2016 
300 |a 4 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
500 |a Gesehen am 09.12.2019 
520 |a Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MIP) and conventional percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in the treatment of patients with large renal stone burden. MIP has proven its efficacy and safety in the management of small renal calculi. However, conventional PCNL is still considered the standard method for treatment of large renal stones in the upper urinary tract. Materials and methods: A search of two longitudinal databases in two tertiary referral centres for complex stone disease identified 133 consecutive patients who were treated by either MIP or PCNL for renal stones 20 mm or larger between January 2009 and August 2012. Clinical data and outcome measures of the two methods were compared by Student’s t test, chi-squared test or Fisher’s exact test. A p value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Operative time was significantly shorter and hospital stay was significantly longer in conventional PCNL compared to MIP (p = 0.002 and < 0.001, respectively). There were no significant differences in primary stone-free rate or complication rate between the two methods. Only higher graded complications (above Clavien grade II) were significantly more common in conventional PCNL (p = 0.02). Conclusion: MIP is equally effective as conventional PCNL in the treatment of large renal calculi. Both methods have a similar complication rate. The shorter operative time in PCNL may be based on the larger diameter and quicker retrieval of large fragments; the longer mean hospital stay may be caused by the handling of the nephrostomy tube. The current data suggest that the choice of the method mainly depends on the surgeon’s preference. 
650 4 |a Conventional PCNL 
650 4 |a large-sized renal calculi 
650 4 |a minimally invasive PCNL 
700 1 |a Wendt-Nordahl, Gunnar  |d 1975-  |e VerfasserIn  |0 (DE-588)12482272X  |0 (DE-627)366751255  |0 (DE-576)294520422  |4 aut 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Scandinavian journal of urology  |d Abingdon : Taylor & Francis, 2013  |g 50(2016), 3, Seite 212-215  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)736122184  |w (DE-600)2702519-6  |w (DE-576)37873217X  |x 2168-1813  |7 nnas  |a Minimally invasive versus conventional large-bore percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of large-sized renal calculi surgeon’s preference? 
773 1 8 |g volume:50  |g year:2016  |g number:3  |g pages:212-215  |g extent:4  |a Minimally invasive versus conventional large-bore percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of large-sized renal calculi surgeon’s preference? 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.3109/21681805.2016.1155078  |x Verlag  |x Resolving-System  |3 Volltext 
951 |a AR 
992 |a 20191209 
993 |a Article 
994 |a 2016 
998 |g 12482272X  |a Wendt-Nordahl, Gunnar  |m 12482272X:Wendt-Nordahl, Gunnar  |d 60000  |e 60000PW12482272X  |k 0/60000/  |p 2 
999 |a KXP-PPN1684882419  |e 3562203985 
BIB |a Y 
SER |a journal 
JSO |a {"title":[{"title_sort":"Minimally invasive versus conventional large-bore percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of large-sized renal calculi","subtitle":"surgeon’s preference?","title":"Minimally invasive versus conventional large-bore percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of large-sized renal calculi"}],"person":[{"roleDisplay":"VerfasserIn","display":"Abdelhafez, Mohamed","role":"aut","family":"Abdelhafez","given":"Mohamed"},{"roleDisplay":"VerfasserIn","display":"Wendt-Nordahl, Gunnar","role":"aut","family":"Wendt-Nordahl","given":"Gunnar"}],"language":["eng"],"recId":"1684882419","type":{"media":"Online-Ressource","bibl":"article-journal"},"note":["Gesehen am 09.12.2019"],"id":{"doi":["10.3109/21681805.2016.1155078"],"eki":["1684882419"]},"origin":[{"dateIssuedKey":"2016","dateIssuedDisp":"24 March 2016"}],"name":{"displayForm":["Mohamed F. Abdelhafez, Gunnar Wendt-Nordahl, Stefan Kruck, Rene Mager, Arnulf Stenzl, Thomas Knoll and David Schilling"]},"relHost":[{"title":[{"title_sort":"Scandinavian journal of urology","title":"Scandinavian journal of urology"}],"part":{"text":"50(2016), 3, Seite 212-215","volume":"50","extent":"4","year":"2016","issue":"3","pages":"212-215"},"pubHistory":["47.2013 -"],"language":["eng"],"corporate":[{"roleDisplay":"Herausgebendes Organ","display":"Scandinavian Association of Urology","role":"isb"}],"recId":"736122184","type":{"bibl":"periodical","media":"Online-Ressource"},"note":["Gesehen am 19.10.23","Fortsetzung der Druck-Ausgabe"],"disp":"Minimally invasive versus conventional large-bore percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of large-sized renal calculi surgeon’s preference?Scandinavian journal of urology","id":{"issn":["2168-1813"],"zdb":["2702519-6"],"eki":["736122184"]},"origin":[{"publisherPlace":"Abingdon ; London","dateIssuedDisp":"2013-","publisher":"Taylor & Francis ; Informa Healthcare","dateIssuedKey":"2013"}],"physDesc":[{"extent":"Online-Ressource"}]}],"physDesc":[{"extent":"4 S."}]} 
SRT |a ABDELHAFEZMINIMALLYI2420