Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy

Indications and Outcomes
  • Paul K. Pietrow
Chapter
Part of the Current Clinical Urology book series (CCU)

Abstract

The management of renal calculus disease underwent drastic changes in the early 1980s with the arrival of percutaneous surgery and Shockwave lithotripsy within several years of each other. Previously, patients were managed with an array of open procedures, including pyelolithomy, ureterolithotomy and anatrophic nephrolithotomy. The opportunity to effectively manage renal calculi in a percutaneous manner has drastically reduced patient morbidity when compared to an open, flank approach. Fernstrom and Johansson were the first to describe a percutaneous approach to the renal collecting system for the management of calculi (1). Much of the early pioneering efforts were performed at the University of Minnesota and were made possible by the arrival of improved equipment and of an effective ultrasonic device that could be used to destroy and remove stones of varying compositions (2). Although the availability of improved access devices, nephroscopes and lithotrites have made this procedure more facile and safe, the basic principles and techniques have not changed dramatically over the past 20 yr.

Key Words

Nephrolithiasis kidney percutaneous access nephrolithotomy 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Fernstrom I, Johansson B. Percutaneous pyelolithotomy. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1976; 10: 257.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Castaneda-Zuniga WR, Clayman R, Smith A, Rusnak B, Herrera M, Amplatz K. Nephrostolithotomy: percutaneous techniques for urinary calculus removal. 1982. J Urol 2002; 167 (2 Pt 2): 849–853.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dretler SP. Stone fragility—a new therapeutic distinction. J Urol 1988; 139(5): 1124–1127.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zhong P, Preminger GM. Mechanisms of differing stone fragility in extracorporeal Shockwave lithotripsy. J Endourol 1994; 8(4): 263–268.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cranidis AI, Karayannis AA, Delakas DS, Livadas CE, Anezinis PE. Cystine stones: the efficacy of percutaneous and shock wave lithotripsy. Urol Int 1996; 56(3): 180–183.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Katz G, Lencovsky Z, Pode D, Shapiro A, Caine M. Place of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in management of cystine calculi. Urology 1990; 36(2): 124–128.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Canales B, Monga M. Surgical management of the calyceal diverticulum. Curr Opin Urol 2003; 13(3): 255–260.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schwartz BF, Stoller ML. Percutaneous management of caliceal diverticula. Urol Clin North Am 2000; 27(4): 635–645.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Albala DM, Assimos DG, Clayman RV, et al. Lower pole I: a prospective randomized trial of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrostolithotomy for lower pole nephrolithiasis-initial results. J Urol 2001; 166(6): 2072–2080.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Elbahnasy AM, Clayman RV, Shalhav AL, et al. Lower-pole caliceal stone clearance after Shockwave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and flexible ureteroscopy: impact of radiographic spatial anatomy. J Endourol 1998; 12(2): 113–119.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rubenstein JN, Gonzalez CM, Blunt LW, Clemens JQ, Nadler RB. Safety and efficacy of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with neurogenic bladder dysfunction. Urology 2004; 63(4): 636–640.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Raj GV, Auge BK, Weizer AZ, et al. GM. Percutaneous management of calculi within horseshoe kidneys. J Urol 2003; 170(1): 48–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    McAleer IM, Kaplan GW, Bradley JS, Carroll SF, Griffith DP. Endotoxin content in renal calculi. J Urol 2003; 169(5): 1813, 1814.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Segura JW, Preminger GM, Assimos DG, et al. Nephrolithiasis Clinical Guidelines Panel summary report on the management of staghorn calculi. The American Urological Association Nephrolithiasis Clinical Guidelines Panel. 1994; J Urol 151(6): 1648–1651.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Meretyk S, Gofrit ON, Gafni O, Pode D, Shapiro A, Verstandig A, Sasson T, Katz G, Landau EH. Complete staghorn calculi: random prospective comparison between extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy monotherapy and combined with percutaneous nephrostolithotomy. J Urol 1997; 157(3): 780–786.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chandhoke PS. Cost-effectiveness of different treatment options for staghorn calculi. J Urol 1996; 156(5): 1567–1571.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wong C, Leveillee RJ. Single upper-pole percutaneous access for treatment of or = 5-cm complex branched staghorn calculi: is Shockwave lithotripsy necessary? J Endourol 2002; 16(7): 477–481.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lam HS, Lingeman JE, Mosbaugh PG, et al. Evolution of the technique of combination therapy for staghorn calculi: a decreasing role for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 1992; 148 (3 Pt 2): 1058–1062.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Martin X, Tajra LC, Gelet A, Dawahra M, Konan PG, Dubernard JM. Complete staghorn stones: percutaneous approach using one or multiple percutaneous accesses. J Endourol 1999; 13(5): 367, 368.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Delvecchio FC, Preminger GM. Management of residual stones. Urol Clin North Am 2000; 27(2): 347–354.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Maheshwari PN, Andankar M, Hegde S, Bansal M. Bilateral single-session percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a feasible and safe treatment. J Endourol 2000; 14(3): 285–287.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Silverstein AD, Terranova SA, Auge BK, et al. Bilateral renal calculi: assessment of staged v synchronous percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 2004; 18(2): 145–151.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Holman E, Salah MA, Toth C. Comparison of 150 simultaneous bilateral and 300 unilateral percutaneous nephrolithotomies. J Endourol 2002; 16(1): 33–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dushinski JW, Lingeman JE. Simultaneous bilateral percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Urol 1997; 158(6): 2065–2068.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gupta R, Kumar A, Kapoor R, Srivastava A, Mandhani A. Prospective evaluation of safety and efficacy of the supracostal approach for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. BJU Int 2002; 90(9): 809–813.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Munver R, Delvecchio FC, Newman GE, Preminger GM. Critical analysis of supracostal access for percutaneous renal surgery. J Urol 2001; 166(4): 1242–1246.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Martin X, Tajra LC, Gelet A, Dawahra M, Konan PG, Dubernard JM. Complete staghorn stones: percutaneous approach using one or multiple percutaneous accesses. J Endourol 1999; 13(5): 367,368.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Young AT, Hulbert JC, Cardella JF, et al. Percutaneous nephrostolithotomy: application to staghorn calculi. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1985; 145(6): 1265–1269.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pietrow PK, Auge BK, Lallas CD, et al. Pain after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: impact of nephrostomy tube size. J Endourol 2003; 17(6): 411–414.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Liatsikos EN, Horn D, Dinlenc CZ, et al. Tail stent versus re-entry tube: a randomized comparison after percutaneous stone extraction. Urology 2002; 59(1): 15–19.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bellman GC, Davidoff R, Candela J, Gerspach J, Kurtz S, Stout L. Tubeless percutaneous renal surgery. J Urol 1997; 157(5): 1578–1582.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Limb J, Bellman GC. Tubeless percutaneous renal surgery: review of first 112 patients. Urology 2002; 59(4): 527–531.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Noller MW, Baughman SM, Morey AF, Auge BK. Fibrin sealant enables tubeless percutaneous stone surgery. J Urol 2004; 172(1): 166–169.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lee DI, Uribe C, Eichel L, et al. Sealing percutaneous nephrolithotomy tracts with gelatin matrix hemostatic sealant: initial clinical use. J Urol 2004; 171 (2 Pt 1): 575–578.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Desai MR, Kukreja RA, Desai MM, et al. A prospective randomized comparison of type of nephrostomy drainage following percutaneous nephrosto lithotomy: large bore versus small bore versus tubeless. J Urol 2004; 172(2): 565–567.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pietrow PK, Auge BK, Zhong P, Preminger GM. Clinical efficacy of a combination pneumatic and ultrasonic lithotrite. J Urol 2003; 169(4): 1247–1249.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hofmann R, Weber J, Heidenreich A, Varga Z, Olbert P. Experimental studies and first clinical experience with a new Lithoclast and ultrasound combination for lithotripsy. Eur Urol 2002; 42(4): 376–381.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    LeRoy AJ, Williams HJ Jr, Bender CE, Segura JW, Patterson DE, Benson RC. Colon perforation following percutaneous nephrostomy and renal calculus removal. Radiology 1985; 155(1): 83–85.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wolf JS Jr. Management of intraoperatively diagnosed colonic injury during percutaneous nephrostolithotomy. Tech Urol 1998; 4(3): 160–164.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Gerspach JM, Bellman GC, Stoller ML, Fugelso P. Conservative management of colon injury following percutaneous renal surgery. Urology 1997; 49(6): 831–836.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ogan K, Pearle MS. Oops we got in the chest: fluoroscopic chest tube insertion for hydrothorax after percutaneous nephrostolithotomy. Urology 2002; 60(6): 1098, 1099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul K. Pietrow

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations