Skip to main content

PNL: Indications and Guidelines: Urolithiasis

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Supine Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and ECIRS

Abstract

It is essential to clearly define the indications for PNL according to established guidelines for the treatment of urolithiasis. A thorough preoperative workup should identify stone (size, location, composition and hardness) and patient features (including special situations like urinary malformations, skeletal deformities, paediatric age or pregnancy), in order to define the indication to the percutaneous approach and possibly find out the best candidates for the supine position.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Preminger GM, Assimos DG, Lingeman JE et al (2005) Nephrolithiasis guideline panel Chapter 1, AUA guidelines on management of staghorn calculi: diagnosis and treatment recommendation. J Urol 173:1991–2000

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Türk C, Knoll T, Petrik A et al (2012) Guidelines on urolithiasis, European Association of Urology. http://www.uroweb.org/gls/pdf/20_Urolithiasis_LR%20March%2013%202012.pdf

  3. Denstedt J, Khoary S (2008) Stone disease. In: 2nd international consultation on stone disease. Health Publications (Editions 21), Paris

    Google Scholar 

  4. Worster A, Preyra I, Weaver B et al (2002) The accuracy of non contrast helical computed tomography versus intravenous pyelography in the diagnosis of suspected acute urolithiasis: a meta-analysis. Ann Emerg Med 40:280–286

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Morcos SK, Thomsen HS, Webb JA (2001) Contrast media safety committee of the European society of urogenital radiology prevention of generalized reactions to contrast media: a consensus report and guidelines. Eur Radiol 11:1720–1728

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Thomsen HS, Morcos SK (2003) Contrast media and the kidney: European society of urogenital radiology (ESUR) guidelines. Br J Radiol 76:513–518

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Aga P, Bansal R (2010) Is intravenous urogram no longer an imaging of choice for percutaneous nephrolithotomy? Indian J Urol 26:303–304

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Mishra S, Sabnis RB, Desai MR (2012) Staghorn morphometry: a new tool for clinical classification and prediction model for percutaneous nephrolithotomy monotherapy. J Endourol 26:6–14

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Tiselius HG, Ackermann D, Alken P et al (2001) Working party on lithiasis, European Association of Urology. Eur Urol 40:362–371

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Teichman JM, Long RD, Hulbert JC (1995) Long term renal fate and prognosis after staghorn calculus management. J Urol 153:1403–1407

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Meretyk S, Gofrit ON, Gafni O et al (1997) Complete staghorn calculi: randomized prospective comparison between extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy monotherapy and combined with percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Urol 157:780–786

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Lingeman JE, Siegel YI, Steele B (2005) Management of lower pole nephrolithiasis. J Urol 173:469–473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Albala DM, Assimos DG, Clayman RV et al (2001) A prospective randomized trial of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrostolithotomy for lower pole nephrolithiasis: initial results. J Urol 166:2072–2080

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Turna B, Raza A, Moussa S et al (2007) Management of calyceal diverticular stones with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy: long term outcome. BJU Int 100:151–156

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Wen CC, Nakada SY (2007) Treatment selection and outcomes: renal calculi. Urol Clin North Am 34:409–419

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Shah K, Kurien A, Mishra S et al (2010) Predicting effectiveness of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy by stone attenuation value. J Endourol 24:1169–1173

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. El Nahas AR, El Assmy AM, Manour O et al (2007) A prospective multivariate analysis of factors predicting stone disintegration by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: the value of high resolution non contrast computed tomography. Eur Urol 51:1688–1693

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arvind P. Ganpule .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag France

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ganpule, A.P., Desai, M.R. (2014). PNL: Indications and Guidelines: Urolithiasis. In: Scoffone, C., Hoznek, A., Cracco, C. (eds) Supine Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and ECIRS. Springer, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-2-8178-0459-0_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-2-8178-0459-0_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Paris

  • Print ISBN: 978-2-8178-0359-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-2-8178-0459-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics