Skip to main content
Log in

Does aging affect the outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy?

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

Abstract

To investigate whether aging affects surgical outcomes by comparing the results of two patient groups undergoing PNL: those over 60 and those under 60. A retrospective screen was made for patients undergoing conventional PNL surgery for renal stones performed in two separate centers between 2010 and 2013. 520 patients included were classified into age groups: patients aged 18–59 comprised Group-1 and those aged over 60 comprised Group-2. Those between 60–69 years (sexagenarian) were assigned to Group-2a; 70–79 years (septuagenarian) to Group-2b; and 80–89 years (octogenarian) to Group-2c. Patients' demographic characteristics (accompanying comorbidities, ASA scores, body mass indices and stone size) and perioperative values (duration of surgery and hospital stay, success and complication rates) were compared between the groups. Mean stone size was similar in groups (30.1 ± 15.5 vs. 31.5 ± 15.4 mm, p = 0.379). The mean ASA value for the patients in Group-1 was 1.61; significantly lower than that in the other groups (p = 0.000). The level of accompanying comorbidities in Group-1 was significantly lower than that of the other groups (p = 0.000). The mean duration of surgery, postoperative hematocrit drop, complication and success rate were statistically similar in Groups 1 and 2 (p = 0.860, p = 0.430, p = 0.7, and p = 0.66, respectively). The duration of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the patients in Group-1 compared to those in Group-2 (p = 0.008). In experienced hands, PNL can be safely and reliably performed in the treatment of renal stones in elderly patients.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

PNL:

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy

URS:

Ureteroscopy

SWL:

Shockwave lithotripsy

WHO:

World Health Organization

US:

Ultrasonography

IVU:

Intravenous urography

CT:

Computed tomography

KUB:

Kidney Ureters and Bladder radiography

References

  1. Turk C, Knoll T, Petrik A, Sarica K, Skolarikos A, Straub M, Seitz C (2013) Selection of procedure for active removal of kidney stones. EUA Guidelines on Urolithiasis, pp 46–48

  2. Rana AM, Bhojwani JP (2009) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in renal anomalies of fusion, ectopia, rotation, hypoplasia, and pelvicalyceal aberration: uniformity in heterogeneity. J Endourol 23:609–614

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gupta N, Mishra S, Seth A, Anand A (2009) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in abnormal kidneys: Single-center experience. Urology 73:710–714

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Schuster TK, Smaldone MC, Averch TD, Ost MC (2009) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children. J Endourol 23:1699–1705

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Stoller ML, Bolton D, St Lezin M, Lawrence M (1994) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the elderly. Urology 44:651–654

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sahin A, Atsü N, Erdem E, Oner S, Bilen C, Bakkaloglu M, Kendi S (2001) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients aged 60 years or older. J Endourol 15(5):489–491

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Resorlu B, Diri A, Atmaca AF, Tuygun C, Oztuna D, Bozkurt OF, Unsal A (2012) Can we avoid percutaneous nephrolithotomy in high-risk elderly patients using the Charlson comorbidity index? Urology 79(5):1042–1047

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Nakamon T, Kitirattrakarn P, Lojanapiwat B (2013) Outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy: comparison of elderly and younger patients. Int Braz J Urol 39:692–701

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kuzgunbay B, Turunc T, Yaycioglu O, Kayis AA, Gul U, Egilmez T, Aygun C, Ozkardes H (2011) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for staghorn kidney stones in elderly patients. Int Urol Neph 43:639–643

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dogan HS, Tekgul S (2012) Minimally invasive surgical approaches to kidney stones in children. Curr Urol Rep 13:298–306

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. WHO (2013) Ageing and life course. http://www.who.int/ageing/en/index.html.19.09.2013

  12. Okeke Z, Smith AD, Labate G, D’Addesi A, Venkatesh R, Assimos D, Stijbos WE, de la Rosette JJ, CROES PCNL Study Group (2012) Prospective comparison of outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in elderly patients versus younger patients. J Endourol 26:996–1001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Anagnostou T, Thompson T, Ng C-F, Moussa S, Smith G, Tolley DA (2008) Safety and outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the elderly: retrospective comparison to a younger patient group. J Endourol 22:2139–2146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Akbari NR (2007) Percutaneous nephrolithotripsy complication in the elderly. Aging Male 10:77–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Tonner PH, Kampen J, Scholz J (2003) Pathophysiological changes in the elderly. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol 17:163–177

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Priebe H (2000) The aged cardiovascular risk patient. Br J Anaesth 85:763–778

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Sieber FE (2009) Postoperative delirium in the elderly surgical patient. Anesthesiol Clin 27:451–464

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ibrahım Buldu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Buldu, I., Tepeler, A., Karatag, T. et al. Does aging affect the outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy?. Urolithiasis 43, 183–187 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-014-0742-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-014-0742-4

Keywords

Navigation