Please wait a minute...
Search Asian J Urol Advanced Search
Share 
Asian Journal of Urology, 2022, 9(3): 301-306    doi: 10.1016/j.ajur.2022.03.002
  本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
Evaluating factors associated with the risk of hydrothorax following standard supracostal percutaneous nephrolithotomy
Pankaj N. Maheshwari*(),Amandeep Arora,Mahesh S. Sane,Vivek Jadhao
Department of Urology, Fortis Hospital Mulund, Mumbai, India
下载:  HTML  PDF (578KB) 
输出:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
Abstract: 

Objective: To report our experience with supracostal percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SC-PNL) and evaluate factors which could predict the risk of hydrothorax following SC-PNL.
Methods: We reviewed 347 patients who underwent SC-PNL from January 2011 to December 2019. Patients were assessed for demographic characteristics, indication for the supracostal access, level of supracostal access, anatomy of the kidney (normal or malrotated), site of the puncture in relation to the mid-scapular line (medial or lateral), and whether another subcostal tract for stone clearance was required or not. Patients were assessed for the incidence of hydrothorax and requirement of intercostal drain depending on the level of percutaneous access. In addition, a multivariable logistic regression analysis model was developed to identify factors which could predict the occurrence of hydrothorax following SC-PNL.
Results: Of the 347 patients with SC-PNL, 248 (71.5%) underwent a supra-12th rib approach, while the rest needed a supra-11th (n=85; 24.5%) or a supra-10th (n=14; 4.0%) rib tract. Overall, 17 (4.9%) patients developed a hydrothorax, while an intercostal-drain was required in seven of these 17 patients for 48 h. None of the patients with a supra-12th rib puncture required an intercostal-drain. More than a third of the patients with a supra-10th puncture developed a hydrothorax (35.7%) and all of them required an intercostal drain. Factors such as anteriorly malrotated kidney (odds ratio [OR]=2.722; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.042-5.617, p=0.03), puncture medial to the mid-scapular line (OR=1.669; CI=0.542-1.578, p=0.03), and an access higher than the supra-12th level (OR=5.265; CI=1.292-9.342, p<0.001) proved to be independent predictors of hydrothorax following a SC-PCNL on multivariable analysis.
Conclusion: Incidence of clinically significant hydrothorax requiring an intercostal-drain after SC-PNL is very low. Knowledge of the predicting factors will help to anticipate the risk of hydrothorax in a particular patient and take necessary peri-operative measures.

Key words:  Calculous disease    Stone    Supracostal    Percutaneous nephrolithotomy    Hydrothorax
收稿日期:  2020-06-22      修回日期:  2021-04-08      接受日期:  2021-06-15      出版日期:  2022-07-20      发布日期:  2022-08-24      整期出版日期:  2022-07-20
引用本文:    
. [J]. Asian Journal of Urology, 2022, 9(3): 301-306.
Pankaj N. Maheshwari,Amandeep Arora,Mahesh S. Sane,Vivek Jadhao. Evaluating factors associated with the risk of hydrothorax following standard supracostal percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Asian Journal of Urology, 2022, 9(3): 301-306.
链接本文:  
http://www.ajurology.com/CN/10.1016/j.ajur.2022.03.002  或          http://www.ajurology.com/CN/Y2022/V9/I3/301
  
  
Stone burden Supra-12th puncture, n Supra-11th puncture, n Supra-10th puncture, n Total, n (%)
Upper calyceal stone 43 13 7 63 (18.2)
Staghorn stone 133 34 4 171 (49.3)
Impacted large upper ureteric stone 40 22 0 62 (17.9)
Upper ureteric stone with lower calyceal stone 26 13 0 39 (11.2)
Upper calyx diverticular stone 6 3 3 12 (3.5)
Total 248 85 14 347
  
Variable All supracostal punctures (n=347) Supra-12th punctures (n=248) Supra-11th punctures (n=85) Supra-10th punctures (n=14) p-Value
Hydrothorax, n (%) 17 (4.9) 3 (1.2) 9 (10.6) 5 (35.7) <0.001 (supra-11th vs. supra-12th); 0.026 (supra-10th vs. supra-11th)
Intercostal drain, n (%) 7 (2.0) 0 2 (2.4) 5 (35.7) 0.06 (supra-11th vs. supra-12th); <0.001 (supra- 10th vs. supra-11th)
  
Variable Univariable analysis Multivariable analysis
OR (95% CI) p-Value OR (95% CI) p-Value
Age (≤18 vs. >18), year 1.112 (1.032-1.203) 0.02 1.082 (0.899-1.215) 0.3
Renal anatomy (anteriorly malrotated vs. normal) 2.803 (1.131-5.364) 0.026 2.722 (1.042-5.617) 0.03
Puncture in relation to mid-scapular line (medial vs. lateral) 1.733 (1.071-2.738) 0.03 1.669 (0.542-1.578) 0.03
Level of supracostal puncture (Supra-10th or 11th vs. supra-12th) 4.677 (1.763-7.771) <0.001 5.265 (1.292-9.342) <0.001
Number of tracts (supra + subcostal vs. only supracostal) 1.250 (0.467-1.044) 0.1 - -
  
[1] Turk C, Neisius A, Petrik C, Seitz A, Skolarikos B, Thomas K. EAU urolithiasis guidelines. https://uroweb.org/guideline/urolithiasis/. [Accessed 5 March 2020].
[2] Munver R, Delvecchio FC, Newman GE, Preminger GM. Critical analysis of supracostal access for percutaneous renal surgery. J Urol 2001; 166:1242e6.
pmid: 11547050
[3] Kekre NS, GopalakrishnanGG, GuptaGG, AbrahamBN, Sharma E. Supracostal approach in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: experience with 102 cases. J Endourol 2001; 15:789e91.
pmid: 11724115
[4] Yadav R, Aron M, Gupta NP, Hemal AK, Seth A, Kolla SB. Safety of supracostal punctures for percutaneous renal surgery. Int J Urol 2006; 13:1267e70.
doi: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2006.01537.x
[5] Mousavi-Bahar SH, Mehrabi S, Moslemi MK. The safety and efficacy of PCNL with supracostal approach in the treatment of renal stones. Int Urol Nephrol 2011; 43:983e7.
doi: 10.1007/s11255-011-9916-y pmid: 21394440
[6] Sukumar S, Nair B, Kumar PG, Sanjeevan KV, Bhat HS. Supracostal access for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: less morbid, more effective. Int Urol Nephrol 2008; 40:263e7.
pmid: 17899435
[7] Ozgor F, Tepeler A, Basibuyuk I, Kucuktopcu O, Kayali Y, Yanaral F, et al. Supracostal access for miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy: comparison of supracostal and infracostal approaches. Urolithiasis 2018; 46:279e83.
doi: 10.1007/s00240-017-0976-z
[8] Mahmood Ahmed M, Ahmad Najar F. Safety and efficacy of supracostal superior calyceal approach for percutaneous renal surgery. Turk J Urol 2018; 45(Supp. 1):S121e4. https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2018.47529.
[9] Shaban A, Kodera A, El Ghoneimy MN, Orban TZ, Mursi K, Hegazy A. Safety and efficacy of supracostal access in percutaneous renal surgery. J Endourol 2008; 22:29e33.
pmid: 18095859
[10] Sinha M, Krishnappa P, Subudhi SK, Krishnamoorthy V. Supracostal percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a prospective comparative study. Indian J Urol 2016; 32:45e9.
doi: 10.4103/0970-1591.173121
[11] He Z, Tang F, Lu Z, He Y, Wei G, Zhong F, et al. Comparison of supracostal and infracostal access for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic reviewandmeta-analysis. Urol J 2019; 16:107e14.
[12] Kara C, De_girmenci T, Kozacioglu Z, Gunlusoy B, Koras O, Minareci S. Supracostal approach for PCNL: is 10th and 11th intercostal space safe according to Clavien classification system? Int Surg 2014; 99:857e62.
doi: 10.9738/INTSURG-D-13-00167.1
[13] Maheshwari PN, Mane DA, Pathak AB. Management of pleural injury after percutaneous renal surgery. J Endourol 2009; 23:1769e72.
doi: 10.1089/end.2009.1549 pmid: 19785558
[14] de la Rosette J, Assimos D, Desai M, Gutierrez J, Lingeman J, Scarpa R, et al. The clinical research office of the endourological society percutaneous nephrolithotomy global study: indications, complications, and outcomes in 5803 patients. J Endourol 2011; 25:11e7.
doi: 10.1089/end.2010.0424 pmid: 21247286
[15] Maheshwari PN, Chopade DK, Andankar MG. Comment on "Supracostal approach in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: experience of 102 cases". J Endourol 2003; 17:529e30.
pmid: 14565888
[16] Stening SG, Bourne S. Supracostal percutaneous nephrolithotomy for upper pole caliceal calculi. J Endourol 1998; 12:359e62.
pmid: 9726403
[17] Goldberg H, Nevo A, Shtabholtz Y, Lubin M, Baniel J, Margel D, et al. Tubeless supra-costal percutaneous nephrolithotomy is associated with significantly less hydrothorax: a prospective randomized clinical study. BJU Int 2020; 125:276e83.
doi: 10.1111/bju.14950 pmid: 31721407
No related articles found!
No Suggested Reading articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed