Cargando…

Free-flank modified supine vs. prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A prospective randomised trial

OBJECTIVE: To compare the technical aspects, operative time, safety and effectiveness of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in the free-flank modified supine position (FFMSP) vs. the standard prone position (SPP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-seven patients (47 men and 30 women) with renal stones...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abdel-Mohsen, Essam, Kamel, Mostafa, Zayed, Abdel-Latif, Salem, Emad A., Ebrahim, Ehab, Abdel Wahab, Khalid, Elaymen, Ahmed, Shaheen, Ashraf, Kamel, Hussien M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4442940/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26579250
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2012.11.002
_version_ 1782372945222434816
author Abdel-Mohsen, Essam
Kamel, Mostafa
Zayed, Abdel-Latif
Salem, Emad A.
Ebrahim, Ehab
Abdel Wahab, Khalid
Elaymen, Ahmed
Shaheen, Ashraf
Kamel, Hussien M.
author_facet Abdel-Mohsen, Essam
Kamel, Mostafa
Zayed, Abdel-Latif
Salem, Emad A.
Ebrahim, Ehab
Abdel Wahab, Khalid
Elaymen, Ahmed
Shaheen, Ashraf
Kamel, Hussien M.
author_sort Abdel-Mohsen, Essam
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare the technical aspects, operative time, safety and effectiveness of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in the free-flank modified supine position (FFMSP) vs. the standard prone position (SPP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-seven patients (47 men and 30 women) with renal stones were enrolled and systematically randomised into two groups, A (39 patients) treated using the FFMSP, and B (38 patients) in the SPP. The outcome was considered as a cure (successful procedure) if the patient became stone-free or had residual fragments of <4 mm in diameter. The operative time (from the induction of anaesthesia to the removal of the endotracheal tube) was measured and any operative complications or conflicts were recorded. The different variables were compared and analysed between the groups. RESULTS: Patients in both groups had comparable preoperative clinical data and there were no significant differences in the preoperative clinical characteristics. The procedure was successful in 84.6% and 84% of group A and B, respectively. The operative time was significantly longer in group B (SPP) than A (FFMSP). There was no significant difference between the groups in fluoroscopy time and patients’ outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The FFMSP (with a cushion under the ipsilateral shoulder) has similar efficacy and safety as the SPP for PCNL and is associated with a significantly quicker operation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4442940
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44429402015-11-17 Free-flank modified supine vs. prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A prospective randomised trial Abdel-Mohsen, Essam Kamel, Mostafa Zayed, Abdel-Latif Salem, Emad A. Ebrahim, Ehab Abdel Wahab, Khalid Elaymen, Ahmed Shaheen, Ashraf Kamel, Hussien M. Arab J Urol Stones / Endourology OBJECTIVE: To compare the technical aspects, operative time, safety and effectiveness of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in the free-flank modified supine position (FFMSP) vs. the standard prone position (SPP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-seven patients (47 men and 30 women) with renal stones were enrolled and systematically randomised into two groups, A (39 patients) treated using the FFMSP, and B (38 patients) in the SPP. The outcome was considered as a cure (successful procedure) if the patient became stone-free or had residual fragments of <4 mm in diameter. The operative time (from the induction of anaesthesia to the removal of the endotracheal tube) was measured and any operative complications or conflicts were recorded. The different variables were compared and analysed between the groups. RESULTS: Patients in both groups had comparable preoperative clinical data and there were no significant differences in the preoperative clinical characteristics. The procedure was successful in 84.6% and 84% of group A and B, respectively. The operative time was significantly longer in group B (SPP) than A (FFMSP). There was no significant difference between the groups in fluoroscopy time and patients’ outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The FFMSP (with a cushion under the ipsilateral shoulder) has similar efficacy and safety as the SPP for PCNL and is associated with a significantly quicker operation. Elsevier 2013-03 2012-12-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4442940/ /pubmed/26579250 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2012.11.002 Text en © 2012 Arab Association of Urology. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
spellingShingle Stones / Endourology
Abdel-Mohsen, Essam
Kamel, Mostafa
Zayed, Abdel-Latif
Salem, Emad A.
Ebrahim, Ehab
Abdel Wahab, Khalid
Elaymen, Ahmed
Shaheen, Ashraf
Kamel, Hussien M.
Free-flank modified supine vs. prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A prospective randomised trial
title Free-flank modified supine vs. prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A prospective randomised trial
title_full Free-flank modified supine vs. prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A prospective randomised trial
title_fullStr Free-flank modified supine vs. prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A prospective randomised trial
title_full_unstemmed Free-flank modified supine vs. prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A prospective randomised trial
title_short Free-flank modified supine vs. prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A prospective randomised trial
title_sort free-flank modified supine vs. prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a prospective randomised trial
topic Stones / Endourology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4442940/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26579250
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2012.11.002
work_keys_str_mv AT abdelmohsenessam freeflankmodifiedsupinevspronepositioninpercutaneousnephrolithotomyaprospectiverandomisedtrial
AT kamelmostafa freeflankmodifiedsupinevspronepositioninpercutaneousnephrolithotomyaprospectiverandomisedtrial
AT zayedabdellatif freeflankmodifiedsupinevspronepositioninpercutaneousnephrolithotomyaprospectiverandomisedtrial
AT salememada freeflankmodifiedsupinevspronepositioninpercutaneousnephrolithotomyaprospectiverandomisedtrial
AT ebrahimehab freeflankmodifiedsupinevspronepositioninpercutaneousnephrolithotomyaprospectiverandomisedtrial
AT abdelwahabkhalid freeflankmodifiedsupinevspronepositioninpercutaneousnephrolithotomyaprospectiverandomisedtrial
AT elaymenahmed freeflankmodifiedsupinevspronepositioninpercutaneousnephrolithotomyaprospectiverandomisedtrial
AT shaheenashraf freeflankmodifiedsupinevspronepositioninpercutaneousnephrolithotomyaprospectiverandomisedtrial
AT kamelhussienm freeflankmodifiedsupinevspronepositioninpercutaneousnephrolithotomyaprospectiverandomisedtrial