Skip to main content
Log in

Stone scattering during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: role of renal anatomical characteristics

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Urolithiasis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate how the upper calyx–lower calyx infundibular (ULI) angle influences intrarenal stone migration during percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in patients with a solitary renal pelvis stone and significant hydronephrosis. 50 adult patients with a solitary renal pelvis stone larger than 20 mm were considered for PCNL with a pneumatic lithotriptor for stone fragmentation. Inclusion criteria were moderate to severe hydronephrosis and upper calyx infundibular width >10 mm, and access point was the lower calyx in all cases. The ULI angle as well as stone fragment migration from the renal pelvis toward the upper calyx was noted during the operation. To determine the “critical” angle above which the probability of stone migration would be increased significantly, receiver operating characteristic curve was used. Mean stone size was 33.8 ± 13.2 mm. In 23 patients (46 %) the stone migrated toward the upper calyx during stone fragmentation. Mean ULI angle was significantly wider in patients whose stone migrated (120.2 ± 20.5 versus 102.2 ± 21.4, P = 0.004, 99 % CI = 6.04–29.9). A ULI angle of 117.5° was the critical angle, above which the rate of stone migration rose significantly (P < 0.008). One-session stone-free rate was significantly higher in patients without stone migration (P = 0.03). In patients with a solitary renal pelvis stone and significant hydronephrosis, a wider ULI angle was associated with a greater likelihood of stone scattering which could potentially affect the outcome of PCNL with pneumatic lithotriptor. A cut-off angle of 117.5° was the critical angle, above which access via a calyx other than the lower calyx (example: middle or upper calyx) seems advisable.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. de la Rosette J, Assimos D, Desai M, Gutierrez J, Lingeman J, Scarpa R, CROES PCNL Study Group et al (2011) The Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Global Study: indications, complications, and outcomes in 5803 patients. J Endourol 25:11–17

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Desai M, De Lisa A, Turna B et al (2011) The clinical research office of the endourological society percutaneous nephrolithotomy global study: staghorn versus nonstaghorn stones. J Endourol 25:1263–1268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Mishra S, Sabnis RB, Desai M (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 

  4. Ganesamoni R, Sabnis RB, Mishra S, Parekh N, Ganpule A, Vyas JB et al (2013) Prospective randomized controlled trial comparing laser lithotripsy with pneumatic lithotripsy in miniperc for renal calculi. J Endourol 27:1444–1449

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Binbay M, Akman T, Ozgor F, Yazici O, Sari E, Erbin A et al (2011) Does pelvicaliceal system anatomy affect success of percutaneous nephrolithotomy? Urol 78:733–737

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wosnitzer M, Xavier K, Gupta M (2009) Novel use of a ureteroscopic stone entrapment device to prevent antegrade stone migration during percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 23:203–207

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Aminsharifi A, Alavi M, Sadeghi G et al (2011) Renal parenchymal damage after percutaneous nephrolithotomy with one-stage tract dilation technique: a randomized clinical trial. J Endourol 25:927–931

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Altunrende F, Tefekli A, Stein RJ et al (2011) Clinically insignificant residual fragments after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: medium-term follow-up. J Endourol 25:941–945

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Skolarikos A, Papatsoris AG (2009) Diagnosis and management of postpercutaneous nephrolithotomy residual stone fragments. J Endourol 23:1751–1755

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Smit M, Verhagen PC (2004) Preventing stone migration during percutaneous nephrolithotomy by using the stone cone. BJU Int 94:671–672

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Tepeler A, Armağan A, Akman T, Polat EC, Ersöz C, Topaktaş R et al (2012) Impact of percutaneous renal access technique on outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 26:828–833

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Aminsharifi A, Haghpanah R, Haghpanah S (2014) Predictors of excessive renal displacement during access in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a randomized clinical trial. Urolithiasis 42:61–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Miller J, Durack JC, Sorensen MD, Wang JH, Stoller ML (2013) Renal calyceal anatomy characterization with 3-dimensional in vivo computerized tomography imaging. J Urol 189:562–567

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by Shiraz University of Medical Sciences. We thank K. Shashok (AuthorAID in the Eastern Mediterranean) for improving the use of English in the manuscript.

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alireza Aminsharifi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aminsharifi, A., Eslahi, A., Safarpour, A.R. et al. Stone scattering during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: role of renal anatomical characteristics. Urolithiasis 42, 435–439 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-014-0678-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-014-0678-8

Keywords

Navigation