Cargando…
Role of pelvicalyceal anatomy in the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for lower pole stones: outcomes with a systematic review of literature
Controversies exist on the influence of lower pole anatomy (infundibular pelvic angle, IPA; infundibular length, IL; and infundibular width, IW) for success and outcomes related to the treatment of stones in the lower pole. We wanted to look at the role of lower pole anatomy to study clinical outcom...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7220875/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31372691 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00240-019-01150-0 |
_version_ | 1783533252302077952 |
---|---|
author | Karim, Sulaiman Sadaf Hanna, Luke Geraghty, Robert Somani, Bhaskar K. |
author_facet | Karim, Sulaiman Sadaf Hanna, Luke Geraghty, Robert Somani, Bhaskar K. |
author_sort | Karim, Sulaiman Sadaf |
collection | PubMed |
description | Controversies exist on the influence of lower pole anatomy (infundibular pelvic angle, IPA; infundibular length, IL; and infundibular width, IW) for success and outcomes related to the treatment of stones in the lower pole. We wanted to look at the role of lower pole anatomy to study clinical outcomes in patients treated for isolated lower pole stones (LPS) using retrograde intra renal surgery (RIRS), and also perform a review to look at the published literature on the influence of pelvicalyceal anatomy on success with RIRS. Data were prospectively collected (June 2013–June 2016) for all patients who underwent RIRS for LPS, and the imaging was then retrospectively reviewed to calculate the IPA, IL and IW using the Elbahnasy method. A systematic review was also conducted for all English language articles between January 2000 and April 2018, reporting on the impact of pelvicaliceal anatomy on RIRS. A total of 108 patients with LPS were included with a male to female ratio of 2:3 and a mean age of 54.7 years. The mean lower pole stone size was 9.3 mm (range 3–29 mm) and 102/108 (94.4%) patients were stone free (SF) at the end of their procedure. While steep IPA (< 30°), operative time duration and larger stone size were significant predictors of failure, the placement of ureteric access sheath, IW and IL did not influence treatment outcomes. Six studies (460 patients) met the inclusion criteria for our review. The IPA, IW, IL for failure ranged from 26° to 38°, 5.5–7 mm and 24–34 mm, respectively. The SFR ranged from 78 to 88% with a metaanalysis showing IPA as the most important predictor of treatment outcomes for LPS. Infundibular pelvic angle seems to be the most important predictor for the treatment of LPS using RIRS. Pelvicalyceal anatomy in conjunction with stone size and hardness seem to dictate the success, and decisions on the type of surgical interventions should reflect this. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7220875 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72208752020-05-14 Role of pelvicalyceal anatomy in the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for lower pole stones: outcomes with a systematic review of literature Karim, Sulaiman Sadaf Hanna, Luke Geraghty, Robert Somani, Bhaskar K. Urolithiasis Original Paper Controversies exist on the influence of lower pole anatomy (infundibular pelvic angle, IPA; infundibular length, IL; and infundibular width, IW) for success and outcomes related to the treatment of stones in the lower pole. We wanted to look at the role of lower pole anatomy to study clinical outcomes in patients treated for isolated lower pole stones (LPS) using retrograde intra renal surgery (RIRS), and also perform a review to look at the published literature on the influence of pelvicalyceal anatomy on success with RIRS. Data were prospectively collected (June 2013–June 2016) for all patients who underwent RIRS for LPS, and the imaging was then retrospectively reviewed to calculate the IPA, IL and IW using the Elbahnasy method. A systematic review was also conducted for all English language articles between January 2000 and April 2018, reporting on the impact of pelvicaliceal anatomy on RIRS. A total of 108 patients with LPS were included with a male to female ratio of 2:3 and a mean age of 54.7 years. The mean lower pole stone size was 9.3 mm (range 3–29 mm) and 102/108 (94.4%) patients were stone free (SF) at the end of their procedure. While steep IPA (< 30°), operative time duration and larger stone size were significant predictors of failure, the placement of ureteric access sheath, IW and IL did not influence treatment outcomes. Six studies (460 patients) met the inclusion criteria for our review. The IPA, IW, IL for failure ranged from 26° to 38°, 5.5–7 mm and 24–34 mm, respectively. The SFR ranged from 78 to 88% with a metaanalysis showing IPA as the most important predictor of treatment outcomes for LPS. Infundibular pelvic angle seems to be the most important predictor for the treatment of LPS using RIRS. Pelvicalyceal anatomy in conjunction with stone size and hardness seem to dictate the success, and decisions on the type of surgical interventions should reflect this. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2019-08-01 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7220875/ /pubmed/31372691 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00240-019-01150-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Original Paper Karim, Sulaiman Sadaf Hanna, Luke Geraghty, Robert Somani, Bhaskar K. Role of pelvicalyceal anatomy in the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for lower pole stones: outcomes with a systematic review of literature |
title | Role of pelvicalyceal anatomy in the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for lower pole stones: outcomes with a systematic review of literature |
title_full | Role of pelvicalyceal anatomy in the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for lower pole stones: outcomes with a systematic review of literature |
title_fullStr | Role of pelvicalyceal anatomy in the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for lower pole stones: outcomes with a systematic review of literature |
title_full_unstemmed | Role of pelvicalyceal anatomy in the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for lower pole stones: outcomes with a systematic review of literature |
title_short | Role of pelvicalyceal anatomy in the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for lower pole stones: outcomes with a systematic review of literature |
title_sort | role of pelvicalyceal anatomy in the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (rirs) for lower pole stones: outcomes with a systematic review of literature |
topic | Original Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7220875/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31372691 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00240-019-01150-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT karimsulaimansadaf roleofpelvicalycealanatomyintheoutcomesofretrogradeintrarenalsurgeryrirsforlowerpolestonesoutcomeswithasystematicreviewofliterature AT hannaluke roleofpelvicalycealanatomyintheoutcomesofretrogradeintrarenalsurgeryrirsforlowerpolestonesoutcomeswithasystematicreviewofliterature AT geraghtyrobert roleofpelvicalycealanatomyintheoutcomesofretrogradeintrarenalsurgeryrirsforlowerpolestonesoutcomeswithasystematicreviewofliterature AT somanibhaskark roleofpelvicalycealanatomyintheoutcomesofretrogradeintrarenalsurgeryrirsforlowerpolestonesoutcomeswithasystematicreviewofliterature |