Comparative study of hemodynamics electrolyte and metabolic changes during prone and complete supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy
- PMID: 23573503
- PMCID: PMC3614315
- DOI: 10.5812/numonthly.4099
Comparative study of hemodynamics electrolyte and metabolic changes during prone and complete supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy
Abstract
Background: Nowadays Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is performed in prone and supine positions. Physiologic solutions should be used to irrigate during PCNL. Irrigation can cause hemodynamic, electrolyte and acid-base changes during PCNL.
Objectives: The current study aimed to compare the electrolyte, hemodynamic and metabolic changes of prone and complete supine PCNL.
Patients and methods: It was a randomized clinical trial study on 40 ASA class I and II patients. Twenty of patients underwent prone PCNL (Group A) and the other twenty underwent complete supine PCNL (Group B). The two groups received the same premedication and induction of anesthesia. Blood pressure (systolic, diastolic and mean) and pulse rate were recorded before, during and after anesthesia and Hb, Hct, BUN, Cr, Na, and K were also measured before and after operation in the two groups. The volume of irrigation fluid, total effluent fluid (the fluid in the bucket and the gazes) and volume of absorbed fluid were measured.
Results: There were no significant differences in Na, K, BUN, Cr, Hb and Hct between the two groups. Absorption volume was significantly different between the two groups (335 ± 121.28 mL in group A and 159.45 ± 73.81 mL in group B, respectively) (P = 0.0001). The mean anesthesia time was significantly different between the two groups (P = 0.012). There was a significant difference in bleeding volume between supine and prone PCNL (270.4 ± 229.14 in group A and 594.2 ± 290 in group B, respectively) (P = 0.0001). Mean systolic blood pressure during operation and recovery was 120.2 ± 10.9 and 140.7 ± 25.1 in group B, and 113.4 ± 6.4 and 126.2 ± 12.7 in group A, respectively. Systolic blood pressure between the two groups during operation and recovery was significantly different (P = 0.027 and P = 0.022, respectively). Mean diastolic blood pressure in supine group during operation and recovery was 80.53 ± 7.57 and 95.75 ± 17.48, and 73.95 ± 3.94 and 83.4 ± 12.54 in prone group, respectively. Diastolic blood pressure was significantly different between the two groups. It was 80.55 ± 7.57 and 95.75 ± 17.48, respectively during operation and recoveryin the supine group and 73.95 ± 3.94 and 83.4 ± 12.54 in the prone group, respectively (P = 0.001 and P = 0.014, respectively), but there was no significant difference between the pulse rate mean value of the two groups.
Conclusions: The electrolyte and metabolic changes were not significantly different between the two groups, and although fluid absorption in prone group was more than that of the complete supine group, there was no significant difference between the two groups. Considering advantages of complete supine PCNL such as less hemodynamic changes (less hypotension, less fluid absorption and less duration of operation) this kind of PCNL was recommended.
Keywords: Electrolyte; Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy; Prone Position; Supine Posion.
Similar articles
-
What is better in percutaneous nephrolithotomy - Prone or supine? A systematic review.Arab J Urol. 2016 Mar 4;14(2):101-7. doi: 10.1016/j.aju.2016.01.005. eCollection 2016 Jun. Arab J Urol. 2016. PMID: 27489736 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Supine versus prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal calculi: Our experience.Curr Urol. 2022 Mar;16(1):25-29. doi: 10.1097/CU9.0000000000000076. Epub 2022 Jan 10. Curr Urol. 2022. PMID: 35633854 Free PMC article.
-
Flank-suspended versus prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy: changes of haemodynamics, arterial blood gases and subjective feelings.Urologia. 2015 Apr-Jun;82(2):102-5. doi: 10.5301/uro.5000108. Epub 2015 Mar 16. Urologia. 2015. PMID: 25791394
-
Prone versus modified supine position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a prospective randomized study.Int J Med Sci. 2013 Aug 31;10(11):1518-23. doi: 10.7150/ijms.6305. eCollection 2013. Int J Med Sci. 2013. PMID: 24046526 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Positions for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: Thirty-five years of evolution.Arab J Urol. 2012 Sep;10(3):307-16. doi: 10.1016/j.aju.2012.06.005. Epub 2012 Aug 11. Arab J Urol. 2012. PMID: 26558042 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
A prospective comparative study of haemodynamic, electrolyte, and metabolic changes during percutaneous nephrolithotomy and minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy.World J Urol. 2014 Oct;32(5):1275-80. doi: 10.1007/s00345-013-1204-2. Epub 2013 Nov 1. World J Urol. 2014. PMID: 24177788 Clinical Trial.
-
Reporting Quality Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trials Published in Nephrology Urology Monthly Journal.Nephrourol Mon. 2015 Jul 1;7(4):e28752. doi: 10.5812/numonthly.28752. eCollection 2015 Jul. Nephrourol Mon. 2015. PMID: 26528446 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Comparison of supine-prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy methods in the treatment of kidney stones in pediatric patients: prospective randomized study.Urolithiasis. 2024 May 2;52(1):73. doi: 10.1007/s00240-024-01543-w. Urolithiasis. 2024. PMID: 38693402 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Changes in blood gas in supine and prone positions in percutaneous stone surgery: does position have any advantage for hemodynamics?Urolithiasis. 2024 Aug 23;52(1):121. doi: 10.1007/s00240-024-01615-x. Urolithiasis. 2024. PMID: 39174867
-
What is better in percutaneous nephrolithotomy - Prone or supine? A systematic review.Arab J Urol. 2016 Mar 4;14(2):101-7. doi: 10.1016/j.aju.2016.01.005. eCollection 2016 Jun. Arab J Urol. 2016. PMID: 27489736 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Alken P, Hutschenreiter G, Gunther R, Marberger M. Percutaneous stone manipulation. J Urol. 1981;125(4):463–6. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources