THE EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF MINI-PERCUTANEOUS NEPHROLITHOTRIPSY IN THE TREATMENT OF LARGE AND STAGHORN STONES OF THE KIDNEY

Introduction. Large (>2 cm) and Staghorn kidney stones are severe forms of: nephrolithiasis. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy is first line in treatment of large kidney stones, according to the recommendations of the American and European associations of urology. In the modern literature is the high frequency of complications after percutaneous nephrolithotripsy, renal bleeding is the most serious of which. Many different methods of treatment with application of nephroscope small diameters in order to achieve acceptable high performance, but with fewer complications.

Objective. We used a mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with large and Staghorn kidney stones.

Materials and methods. From February 2014 to January 2015, one surgeon of our center made 32 mini-percutaneous nephrolithotripsy in patients with large and Staghorn kidney stones. Criteria of effective treatment was the complete removal of stones or the presence of residual calculus size <3 mm. Postoperative complications were evaluated according to modified Clavien classification.

Results. Age ranged from 25 to 67 years. Women was 62.5 percent. The average stone size was 32.4 (21- 62) mm. The average time of surgery was 67.5 (20-200) min. Stone free was 87.5 %. The complication rate was 9.4%. 3.1% - leakage of urine (Clavien 3b), 6.3% - urinary tract infection (Clavien 2).

Conclusion. Mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy is an effective and safe treatment of patients with large and Staghorn kidney stones. It has a minimal complication rate and there is not much blood loss.

1. Martov AG, DutovSV, Andronov AS. Ultraminipercutaneous nephrolithotripsy in treating kidney stones Urology. 2016;2:82-88. (in Russ.)

2. Merinov DS, Pavlov DA, Fatihov RR, Epishov VA, Gurbanov. ShSh, Artemov AV. Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotripsy: delicate and effective tool in the treatment of large kidney stones. Eksperimental'naya i klinicheskaya urologiya. 2013;3:94-98. (in Russ.)

3. Rogachikov VV, Nesterov SN, Il'chenko DN, Tevlin KP, Kudryashov AV. Percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy: past, present, future... Eksperimental'naya i klinicheskaya urologiya. 2016;2:58-66. (in Russ.)

4. Yanenko EK, Merinov DS, Konstantinova OV, Epishov VA, Kalinichenko DN. Modern trends in epidemiology, diagnostic and treatment of urolithiasis. Eksperimental'naya i klinicheskaya urologiya. 2012; 3:19-24. (in Russ.)

5. Abdelhafez MF, BedkeJ, Amend B, EIGanainy E, Aboulella H et al. Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy as an effective and safe procedure for large renal stones. BJU Int. 2012;110:1022-1026. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11191.x

6. Tepeler A, Ba§ibuyuk I, Tosun M, Armagan A. The role of ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of kidney stones. TurkJ Urol. 2016;42(4): 261-266. doi: 10.5152/tud.2016.32644

7. Bellman GC, Davidoff R, Candela J, Gerspach J, Kurtz S, Stout L. Tubeless percutaneous renal surgery. J Urol. 1997;157:1578-82.

8. De la Rosette JJ, Zuazu JR, Tsakiris P, Elsakka AM, Zudaire JJ et al. Prognostic factors and percutaneous nephrolithotomy morbidity: a multivariate analysis of a contemporary series using the Clavien classification. J Urol. 2008;180:2489-93. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.08.025

9. De S, Autorino R, Kim FJ, Zargar H, Laydner H et al. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus intrarenal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur. Urol. 2016;67:125-137. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.12.046

10. Guohua Z, Wen Z, Xun L, Wenzhong C, Yongzhong H et al. The influence of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy on renal pelvic pressure in vivo. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2007;17(4):307-310. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0b013e31806e61f4

11. Helal M, Black T, Lockhart J, Figueroa ТЕ. The Hickman peel away sheath: alternative for pediatric percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol. 1997;11:171-2. doi: 10.1089/end.1997.11.171

12. Kukreja R, Desai M, Patel S, Bapat S, Desai M. Factors affecting blood loss during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: prospective study. J Endourol. 2004;18:715-22. doi: 10.1089/end.2004.18.715

13. Lahme S, Bichler KH, Strohmaier WL, Gotz T. Minimally invasive PCNL in patients with renal pelvic and calyceal stones. EurUrol. 2001;40:619-624.

14. Michel MS, Trojan L, Rassweiler JJ. Complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol. 2007;51:899-906. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.10.020

15. Nagele U, Schilling D, Anastasiadis AG, Walcher U, Sievert KD et al. Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy (MIP). UrologeA. 2008;47(1066):8-73. doi: 10.1007/s00120-008-1814-2

16. Preminger GM, Assimos DG, Lingeman JE, Nakada SY, Pearle MS et al. Chapter 1: AUA guideline on management of staghorn calculi: diagnosis and treatment recommendations. J Urol. 2005;173:1991-2000. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000161171.67806.2a

17. SakrA,Salem E, Kamel M, Desoky E, RagabAetal. Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs standard PCNL for management of renal stones in the flank-free modified supine position: single-center experience. Urolithiasis. 2017. doi: 10.1007/s00240-017-0966-l

18. Skolarikos A, de la Rosette J. Prevention and treatment of complications following percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Curr Opin Urol. 2008;18:229-34. doi: 10.1097/M0ll.0b013e3282f46afc

19. Tefekli A, Ali Karadag M, Tepeler K, Sari E, Berberoglu Y et al. Classification of percutaneous nephrolithotomy complications using the modified Clavien grading system: looking for a standard. Eur Urol. 2008;53:184-90. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.06.049

20. Turk C, Knoll T, Petrik A, Sarica K, Skolarikos A et al. Guidelines on Urolithiasis. Amsterdam, Netherlands: European Association of Urology; 2015. pp. 1-71.

21. ZanettiS, Boeri L, Gallioli A,Talso M, Montanari E. Minimally invasive PCNL-MIP. Arch Esp Urol. 2017;70(l):226-234.

22. Zhou X, Gao X, Wen J, Xiao C. Clinical value of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the supine position under the guidance of real-time ultrasound: report of 92 cases. Urol Res. 2008;36(2):111-114. doi: 10.1007/S00240-008-0134-8