ANALYSIS OF CAUSES, FREQUENCY AND SEVERITY OF ACUTE COMPLICATED PYELONEPHRITIS IN ENDOSCOPIC INTERVENTIONS FOR UROLITHIASIS
https://doi.org/10.21886/2308-6424-2017-5-4-5-12
Abstract
Introduction. Despite the improvement of endoscopic equipment and methods of percutaneous and transurethral interventions on urolithiasis, acute pyelonephritis remains one of the most frequent postoperative complications.
Purpose of the study. Objective assessment of frequency, causes and severity of postoperative pyelonephritis in endoscopic surgery for urolithiasis, as well as additional interventions needed to manage this complication.
Materials and methods. The results of 1027 endoscopic operations (percutaneous and transurethral) performed in Republican Specialized Center of Urology (RSCU, Tashkent, Uzbekistan) for kidney and upper urinary tract stones were analyzed. «Simple» stones were in 446 (43.4%) patients, «complex» – in 581 (56.6%) ones. The severity of postoperative pyelonephritis were assessed using Clavien-Dindo grading system according to the necessity of additional interventions.
Results. Postoperative pyelonephritis developed in 115 (11.2%) patients. According to the systematization of postoperative complications patients with pyelonephritis were distributed as follows: I-0, II-95, IIIa-8, IIIb10, IVa-2, IVb-0, V-0.
Conclusions. Patients with initial urinary tract infection (UTI) and complications arising during endoscopic interventions and in postoperative period should be considered as «patients with absolute risk of postoperative infectious and inflammatory complications development». Complicated pyelonephritis was eradicated conservatively in 82.6% of patients, additional invasive interventions and intensive therapy were required in 17.4% of patients.
About the Authors
F. A. Akilov
Republican Specialized Center of Urology;
Tashkent Medical Academy
Uzbekistan
Uzbekistan
Consultant urologist of RSCU
Doctor of medicine, professor, head of Tashkent medical academy Urology department,
Tashkent
Sh. I. Giyasov
Republican Specialized Center of Urology;
Tashkent Medical Academy
Uzbekistan
Uzbekistan
Consultant urologist of RSCU;
Doctor of medicine, assistant professor, director of masters’ program,
Tashkent
References
1. Khudaybergenov UA, Akilov FA, Makhmudov AT, Tukhtamishev MK. Studying of prevalence of the most significant urological diseases in the Aral Sea Area. European Science Review. 2017;1(2):140-144. doi:10.20534/ ESR-17-1.2-140-144
2. Skolarikos A, Alivizatos G, de la RoseƩ e JJ. Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and its legasy. European Urology. 2005;47(1):22-28. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2004.08.009
3. Lopatkin NA, Trapеznikova MF, Dutov VV, Dzеranov NK. ESWL: past, present and future. Urologiia. 2007; 6:3-12. (in Russ).
4. Trapeznikova MF, Dutov VV, Urenkov SB, Rumyantsev AA, Ivanov AE, Podoinitsyn AA, Rusanova EV, Popov DM. Transcutaneous nephrolithotripsy in presenile and senile patients Urologiia. 2011;3:36-39. (In Russ.).
5. Nouralizadeh A, Lashay A, Ziaee SA, Ahanian A, Sharifi SH, Nikkar MM, Ojand A, Soltani MH. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in high-risk patients: a single-center experience with more than 350 cases. Urologia Internationalis. 2013;90(4):394-398. doi: 10.1159/000347032
6. Ahmеdov RN, Halilov ML, Muhtarov ShT., Rashidov MM, Giyasov ShI. Percutaneous nephrostomy as a method of choice during the treatment of patients with urolithiasis complicated by bacteremiс shock. Infеktsiya, immunitеt i farmakologiya. 2010;5:4-6. (In Russ.).
7. Dogan HS, Guliyev F, Cetinkaya YS, Sofi kerim M, Ozden E, Sahin A. Importance of microbiological evaluation in management of infectious complications following percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Int. Urol. Nephrol. 2007;38(3):737-742. doi: 10.1007/s11255-006-9147-9
8. Mariappan P, Smith G, Bariol. SV, Moussa SA, Tolley DA. Stone and pelvic urine culture and sensitive are beƩ er then bladder urine as predictors of urosepsis following percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a prospective clinical study. Journal of Urology (Baltimore). 2005;173(5):1610- 1614. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000154350.78826.96
9. Ritter M, Krombach P, Michel MS. Percutaneous Stone Removal. European Urology Supplements. 2011;10(5):433-439. doi: 10.1016/j.eursup.2011.07.005
10. Xue W, Pacik D, Boellaard W, Breda A, Botoca M, Rassweiler J, Van Cleynenbreugel B, de la Rosette J. Management of single large nonstaghorn renal stones in the CROES PCNL global study. J Urol. 2012;187(4):1293- 7. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.11.113
11. Labate G, Modi P, Timoney A, Cormio L, Zhang X, Louie M, Grabe M. The percutaneous nephrolithotomy global study: classification of complications. J Endourol. 2011;25(8):1275-80. doi: 10.1089/end.2011.0067
12. Kadlec AO, Greco KA, Fridirici ZC, Hart ST, Vellos TG, Turk TM. Comparison of complication rates for unilateral and bilateral percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) using a modified Clavien grading system. BJU International. 2013;111(4 Pt B):E243-248. doi: 10.1111/j.1464- 410X.2012.11589.x
13. Akilov FA, Giyasov ShI. Rate, reasons and severity of acute complicated pyelonephritis secondary to endoscopic procedures on urolithiasis. Zdorov’е Uzbеkistana. 2016;9(11):72-75. (In Russ.).
14. Giyasov ShI. Complications of endoscopic surgery of nephrolithiasis: causes, classification, strategy, prognosis. AŌ oref. diss. dokt. mеd. nauk. Tashkent Tashkent; 2015. (In Russ.).
15. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P.A. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Annals of Surgery. 2004;240:205-213. doi: 10.1097/01. sla.0000133083.54934.ae
16. Türk C, Neisius A, Petrik A, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, Tepeler A, Thomas K. Guidelines: Urolithiasis. Arnhem: European Association of Urology; 2016. Available at: hƩ p:// uroweb.org/guideurolithiasis/line/ Accessed September 21, 2017.
17. J. Edward Morgan jr., Megid S. Mikhail. Klinichеskaya anеstеziologiya. S. Pеtеrburg: Nevskii dialekt Press; 1999. (in Russ).
18. Akilov FA, Giyasov ShI., Mukhtarov ShT., Nasirov FR. Alidjanov J.F. Applicability of the Clavien-Dindo grading system for assessing the postoperative complications of endoscopic surgery for nephrolithiasis: a critical review. Turkish Journal of Urology. 2013.39(3):153-60. doi: 10.5152/tud.2013.032
Review
For citations:
Akilov F.A., Giyasov Sh.I. ANALYSIS OF CAUSES, FREQUENCY AND SEVERITY OF ACUTE COMPLICATED PYELONEPHRITIS IN ENDOSCOPIC INTERVENTIONS FOR UROLITHIASIS. Urology Herald. 2017;5(4):5-12. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21886/2308-6424-2017-5-4-5-12
Views:
1103
Email this article 
