Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Does the duration between urine culture and percutaneous nephrolithotomy affect the rate of systemic inflammatory response syndrome postoperatively?

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

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the preoperative and intraoperative factors that may cause systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and to investigate the effect of the duration between urine culture (UC) and operation on postoperative SIRS. Three hundred and fifty-six patients who had PCNL between January 2015 and June 2019 were retrospectively included in the study. UC was obtained from all patients before the operation and during the puncture at the beginning of the operation. Postoperatively, patients were closely monitored for fever and other signs of SIRS. The post-PCNL SIRS incidence was 7%. In univariable and multivariable analyses, the rate of ipsilateral PCNL history, recurrent urinary tract infection (UTI) history, operation time and the length of hospital stay were significant predictive factors for SIRS. The duration between UC and PCNL was not a statistically significant variable in both univariable and multivariable analysis. Our study concluded that the duration between UC and PCNL is not an influential factor for post-PCNL SIRS. Clarifying this issue may be possible with prospective studies in which the effects of factors such as ipsilateral PCNL history and recurrent urinary tract infection history which has been proven to be risk factors for post-PCNL SIRS are restricted.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Türk C, Neisius A, Petřík A et al (2020) EAU guidelines on urolithiasis 2020. Eur Assoc Urol Guidel. In: 2020 Ed presented

  2. Preminger GM, Tiselius HG, Assimos DG et al (2007) 2007 guideline for the management of ureteral calculi. J Urol 178:2418–2434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.09.107

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Taylor E, Miller J, Chi T, Stoller ML (2012) Complications associated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy. TranslAndrol Urol 1:223–228. https://doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2223-4683.2012.12.01

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Kreydin EI, Eisner BH (2013) Risk factors for sepsis after percutaneous renal stone surgery. Nat Rev Urol 10:598–605. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2013.183

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. O’keeffe NK, Mortımer AJ, Sambrook PA, Rao PN (1993) Severe sepsis following percutaneous or endoscopic procedures for urinary tract stones. Br J Urol 72:277–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.1993.tb00717.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Draga ROP, Kok ET, Sorel MR et al (2009) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: factors associated with fever after the first postoperative day and systemic inflammatory response syndrome. J Endourol 23:921–927. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2009.0041

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Rivera M, Viers B, Cockerill P et al (2016) Pre- and postoperative predictors of infection-related complications in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 30:982–986. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2016.0191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gutierrez J, Smith A, Geavlete P et al (2013) Urinary tract infections and post-operative fever in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. World J Urol 31:1135–1140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-012-0836-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fernandez A, Foell K, Nott L et al (2011) Percutaneous nephrolithotripsy in patients with urinary diversions: a case–control comparison of perioperative outcomes. J Endourol 25:1615–1618. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2011.0045

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gonen M, Turan H, Ozturk B, Ozkardes H (2008) Factors affecting fever following percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a prospective clinical study. J Endourol 22:2135–2138. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2008.0139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Chen L, Xu QQ, Li JX et al (2008) Systemic inflammatory response syndrome after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: an assessment of risk factors: original article: clinical investigation. Int J Urol 15:1025–1028. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2042.2008.02170.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Doǧan HS, Şahin A, Çetinkaya Y et al (2002) Antibiotic prophylaxis in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: prospective study in 81 patients. J Endourol 16:649–653. https://doi.org/10.1089/089277902761402989

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Koras O, Bozkurt IH, Yonguc T et al (2014) Risk factors for postoperative infectious complications following percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a prospective clinical study. Urolithiasis 43:55–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-014-0730-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Shoshany O, Margel D, Finz C et al (2015) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for infection stones: what is the risk for postoperative sepsis? A retrospective cohort study. Urolithiasis 43:237–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-014-0747-z

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Aron M, Goel R, Gupta NP, Seth A (2005) Incidental detection of purulent fluid in kidney at percutaneous nephrolithotomy for branched renal calculi. J Endourol 19:136–139. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2005.19.136

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Vincitorio D, Barbadoro P, Pennacchietti L et al (2014) Risk factors for catheter-associated urinary tract infection in Italian elderly. Am J Infect Control 42:898–901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2014.05.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hu W, Xie S, Yu F, Hao W (2019) Characteristics of pathogens and mortality predictors of older Chinese patients with nosocomial urinary tract infections. Geriatr Gerontol Int 19:541–546. https://doi.org/10.1111/ggi.13661

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The investigators would like to thank all the patients who participated in this study. The authors have no direct or indirect commercial financial incentive associated with publishing the manuscript. All the co-authors participated equally in writing of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Erzurum Regional Training and Research Hospital, University of Health Sciences, Erzurum, 25240, Turkey

    Fatih Akkas

  2. Department of Urology, Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, University of Health Sciences, Istanbul, 34017, Turkey

    Serdar Karadag & Ahmet Haciislamoglu

Authors
  1. Fatih Akkas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Serdar Karadag
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ahmet Haciislamoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fatih Akkas.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no confict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the insti tutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Akkas, F., Karadag, S. & Haciislamoglu, A. Does the duration between urine culture and percutaneous nephrolithotomy affect the rate of systemic inflammatory response syndrome postoperatively?. Urolithiasis 49, 451–456 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-021-01245-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-021-01245-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation