COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparison of supracostal versus infracostal percutaneous nephrolithotomy using the novel prone-flexed patient position.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is considered standard therapy for large and complex renal calculi. The optimal patient position and puncture site for collecting system access remains controversial. This purpose of this retrospective review is to analyze our PCNL series with respect to puncture tracts, success, and complications using our novel prone-flexed position.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: Perioperative data were collected on consecutive PCNL cases for renal calculi performed in the prone-flexed position from 2004 to 2009. Patient demographic, stone, operative, postoperative, and follow-up data were collected. Successful treatment was defined as stone free or sandlike (≤1  mm) particles visible on CT scan at 3 months.

RESULTS: A total of 318 patients, with a mean age of 52.9 years and body mass index of 27.8  kg/m(2), underwent PCNL in the prone-flexed position (57.9% male). Sixteen tracts were above the 11th rib, 138 were above the 12th rib, and 164 were infracostal. Multiple tracts were used in 16 patients. There were no significant differences between patients undergoing supracostal vs infracostal puncture with respect to side, stone area, number of tracts, number of stones, or the presence of staghorn or struvite calculi. Success in the supracostal group (89.8%) was not statistically different from the infracostal group (94.1%), P>0.05. Overall complication rates across groups was low (11.6%), with a significant difference in complications between the supracostal and infracostal puncture groups across Clavien grades, P<0.01. No patients needed blood transfusions or angioembolization.

CONCLUSION: Regardless of supracostal or infracostal renal access, our novel prone-flexed position assists with percutaneous renal access and ease of nephrolithotomy, while maintaining excellent success rates and minimizing procedural morbidity.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app