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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
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 159:676–682
Gupta NP, Singh DV, Henal AK, Mandal S (2000) Infundibulopelvic anatomy and clearance of inferior caliceal calculi with shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 163:24–27
Geavlete P, Multescu R, Geavlete B et al (2008) Influence of pyelocalyceal anatomy on the success of flexible ureteroscopic approach. J Endourol 22:2235–2239
Binbay M, Akman T, Ozgor F et al (2011) Does pelvicaliceal system anatomy affect success of percutaneous nephrolithotomy? Urology 78:733–738
Kaye KW (1983) Renal anatomy for endourologic stone removal. J Urol 130:647–648
Francisco JBS, Carlos AM (1988) 3-dimensional and radiological pelvicaliceal anatomy for endourology. J Urol 140:1352–1355
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
Testut L, Latarjet A (1971) Anatomia Umana, V edizione. UTET, Torino
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)
Munver R, Delvecchio FC, Neuman GG, Preminger GM (2001) Critical analysis of supracostal access for percutaneous renal surgery. J Urol 166:1242–1246
Lang E, Thomas R, Davis R et al (2009) Risks, advantages, and complications of intercostal versus subcostal approach for percutaneous nephrolithotripsy. Urology 74:751–755
Hopper KD, Sherman JL, Luethke JM et al (1987) The retrorenal colon in the supine and prone patient. Radiology 162:443–446
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 16:1489–1492
Cormio L, Annese P, Corvasce T et al (2007) Percutaneous nephrostomy in supine position. Urology 69:377–380
Duty B, Okhunov Z, Smith A, Okeke Z (2011) The debate over percutaneous nephrolithotomy positioning: a comprehensive review. J Urol 186:20–25
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 25:687–690
Pereira-Sampaio M, Favorito LA, Henry R, Sampaio FJB (2007) Proportional analysis of pig kidney arterial segments: differences from the human kidney. J Endourol 21:784–788
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 179:1627–1630
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 23:2035–2040
Kaye KW, Reinke DB (1984) Detailed caliceal anatomy for endourology. J Urol 132:1085–1087
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 31:1267–1272
Sampaio FJB (2001) Renal collecting system anatomy: its possible role in the effectiveness of renal stone treatment. Curr Opin Urol 11:359–366
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 11:157–161
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 79:61–66
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 165:1415–1418
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer-Verlag France
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Cracco, C.M., Vercelli, A.E. (2014). Anatomy for PNL. 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_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-2-8178-0459-0_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Paris
Print ISBN: 978-2-8178-0359-3
Online ISBN: 978-2-8178-0459-0
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)