Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for 1-2 cm lower-pole renal calculi
- PMID: 19468514
- PMCID: PMC2684377
- DOI: 10.4103/0970-1591.44264
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for 1-2 cm lower-pole renal calculi
Abstract
Objectives: The most appropriate management of patients with lower-pole calyceal (LC) stones remains controversial. In this review we discuss the role of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in the management of LC stones 1-2 cm in maximum dimension.
Materials and methods: A detailed literature review was performed to summarize the recent technical developments and controversies in PCNL. The results of PCNL for 1-2 cm LC calculi were reviewed.
Results: PCNL is increasingly employed as a primary modality in the treatment of LC calculi. It has a high success rate and acceptably low percentage of major complications in experienced hands. Supine position is found to be as safe and effective as prone position. Urologist-acquired access is associated with fewer access-related complications and better stone-free rates. Ultrasound is increasingly employed as an imaging modality for obtaining access. There have been increasing reports of tubeless PCNL in the literature. Most patients undergoing tubeless PCNL do not need hemostatic agents as an adjuvant for hemostasis. Non-contrast computed tomography does not yield statistically valuable increase in the diagnosis of significant residual stones compared with that of plain X-ray and linear tomography. Comprehensive metabolic evaluation and aggressive medical management can control new stone recurrences and growth of residual fragments following PCNL.
Conclusions: PCNL is a highly effective procedure with consistently high stone-free rates when compared with extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy or retrograde intrarenal surgery. The results also do not depend on anatomic factors and stone size. It is associated with low morbidity in experienced hands.
Keywords: Complications; lower calyx; management; percutaneous nephrolithotomy; renal calculi; technique.
Conflict of interest statement
Figures
References
-
- Gerber GS. Management of lower-pole caliceal stones. J Endourol. 2003;17:501–3. - PubMed
-
- Bandi G, Best SL, Nakada SY. Current practice patterns in the management of upper urinary tract calculi in the north central United States. J Endourol. 2008;22:631–6. - PubMed
-
- Chung BI, Aron M, Hegarty NJ, Desai MM. Ureteroscopic versus percutaneous treatment for medium-size (1-2-cm) renal calculi. J Endourol. 2008;22:343–6. - PubMed
-
- McDougall EM. Percutaneous approaches to the upper urinary tract. In: Walsh PC, et al., editors. Campbell's urology. 8th ed. Philadelphia: Sanders; 2002. pp. 3320–60.
-
- Elbahnasy AM, Clayman RV, Shalhav AL, Hoenig DM, Chandhoke P, Lingeman JE, et al. Lower-pole caliceal stone clearance after shockwave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and flexible ureteroscopy: Impact of radiographic spatial anatomy. J Endourol. 1998;12:113–9. - PubMed
