Advertisement

Anatomy for PNL

  • Cecilia Maria CraccoEmail author
  • Alessandro Eugenio Vercelli
Chapter

Abstract

A good preoperative knowledge of the anatomy of the kidney of a given patient (including vascularization and collecting system) and of the topographic relationships of the kidney with the surrounding organs is fundamental in order to choose the best therapeutic approach, foresee possible intraoperative technical difficulties, inform the patient about success and complication rates, prepare a proper and complete endourological armamentarium of instruments and accessories, and plan the best renal puncture. Static anatomy data obtained from preoperative studies should then be integrated with dynamic real-time anatomy investigated by preliminary endoscopy.

Keywords

Renal Pelvis Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy Inferior Pole Renal Sinus Superior Pole 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Elbahnasy AM, Shalkhav AL, Hoenig DM et al (1998) Lower caliceal stone clearance after shock wave lithotripsy or ureteroscopy: the impact of lower pole radiographic anatomy. J Urol 159:676–682PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gupta NP, Singh DV, Henal AK, Mandal S (2000) Infundibulopelvic anatomy and clearance of inferior caliceal calculi with shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 163:24–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Geavlete P, Multescu R, Geavlete B et al (2008) Influence of pyelocalyceal anatomy on the success of flexible ureteroscopic approach. J Endourol 22:2235–2239PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Binbay M, Akman T, Ozgor F et al (2011) Does pelvicaliceal system anatomy affect success of percutaneous nephrolithotomy? Urology 78:733–738PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kaye KW (1983) Renal anatomy for endourologic stone removal. J Urol 130:647–648PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Francisco JBS, Carlos AM (1988) 3-dimensional and radiological pelvicaliceal anatomy for endourology. J Urol 140:1352–1355Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Das S, Dhanraj P, Shyamkumar N et al (2008) Redefining caliceal anatomy in axial plane: selective overlapping of the appropriate contiguous sections on delayed post-contrast CT. Internet J Urol 5(2). doi: 10.5580/fc4
  8. 8.
    Testut L, Latarjet A (1971) Anatomia Umana, V edizione. UTET, TorinoGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sampaio FJB (1996) Surgical anatomy of the kidney. In: Smith AD, Badlani GH, Bagley DH et al (eds) Smith’s textbook of endourology, (part II: percutaneous surgery), chapter 6. Quality Medical Publishing, St. Louis (USA)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Munver R, Delvecchio FC, Neuman GG, Preminger GM (2001) Critical analysis of supracostal access for percutaneous renal surgery. J Urol 166:1242–1246PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lang E, Thomas R, Davis R et al (2009) Risks, advantages, and complications of intercostal versus subcostal approach for percutaneous nephrolithotripsy. Urology 74:751–755PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hopper KD, Sherman JL, Luethke JM et al (1987) The retrorenal colon in the supine and prone patient. Radiology 162:443–446PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tuttle DN, Yeh BM, Meng MV et al (2005) Risk of injury to adjacent organs with lower-pole fluoroscopically guided percutaneous nephrostomy: evaluation with prone, supine, and multiplanar reformatted CT. J Vasc Interv Radiol 16:1489–1492PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cormio L, Annese P, Corvasce T et al (2007) Percutaneous nephrostomy in supine position. Urology 69:377–380PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Duty B, Okhunov Z, Smith A, Okeke Z (2011) The debate over percutaneous nephrolithotomy positioning: a comprehensive review. J Urol 186:20–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Azhar RA, Szymanski KM, Lemercier E et al (2011) Visceral organ-to-percutaneous tract distance is shorter when patients are placed in the prone position on bolsters compared with the supine position. J Endourol 25:687–690PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pereira-Sampaio M, Favorito LA, Henry R, Sampaio FJB (2007) Proportional analysis of pig kidney arterial segments: differences from the human kidney. J Endourol 21:784–788Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bagetti Filho HJS, Pereira-Sampaio MA, Favorito LA, Sampaio FJB (2008) Pig kidney: anatomical relationships between the renal venous arrangement and the kidney collecting system. J Urol 179:1627–1630PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Filho DB, Favorito LA, Costa WS, Sampaio FJB (2009) Kidney lower pole pelvicaliceal anatomy: comparative analysis between intravenous urogram and three-dimensional helical computed tomography. J Endourol 23:2035–2040Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kaye KW, Reinke DB (1984) Detailed caliceal anatomy for endourology. J Urol 132:1085–1087PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yazici O, Binbay M, Akman T, Kewer C et al (2013) Is there a difference in percutaneous nephrolithotomy outcomes among various types of pelvicaliceal system? World J Urol 31:1267–1272Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sampaio FJB (2001) Renal collecting system anatomy: its possible role in the effectiveness of renal stone treatment. Curr Opin Urol 11:359–366PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sampaio FJB, D’Anunciacao AL, Silva ECG (2007) Comparative follow up of patients with acute and obtuse infundibulum-pelvic angle submitted to extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for lower caliceal stones: preliminary report and proposed study design. J Endourol 11:157–161Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Resorlu B, Oguz U, Resorlu EB et al (2012) The impact of pelvicaliceal anatomy on the success of retrograde intrarenal surgery in patients with lower pole renal stones. Urology 79:61–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Madbouly K, Sheir KZ, Elsobky E (2001) Impact of lower pole renal anatomy on stone clearance after shock wave lithotripsy: fact or fiction? J Urol 165:1415–1418PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cecilia Maria Cracco
    • 1
    Email author
  • Alessandro Eugenio Vercelli
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of UrologyCottolengo HospitalTorinoItaly
  2. 2.Neuroscience Institute of the Cavalieri Ottolenghi FoundationOrbassano (Torino)Italy
  3. 3.Department of NeuroscienceUniversity of TorinoTorinoItaly

Personalised recommendations