Cargando…
Endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in the prone split-leg position versus Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia position for the management of partial staghorn calculi
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the outcome of ECIRS in the treatment of partial staghorn renal calculi in both prone split-leg positions versus GMSV positions with regard to; technical aspects, success rate, operative time, complications, safety, and effectiveness of both approaches. PATIENTS AN...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9583483/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36266713 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-022-01115-3 |
_version_ | 1784813081482756096 |
---|---|
author | Abouelgreed, Tamer A. Abdelaal, Mohamed A. Amin, Moamen M. Elatreisy, Adel Shalkamy, Osama Abdrabuh, Abdrabuh M. Ghoneimy, Osama M. Aboutaleb, Hamdy |
author_facet | Abouelgreed, Tamer A. Abdelaal, Mohamed A. Amin, Moamen M. Elatreisy, Adel Shalkamy, Osama Abdrabuh, Abdrabuh M. Ghoneimy, Osama M. Aboutaleb, Hamdy |
author_sort | Abouelgreed, Tamer A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the outcome of ECIRS in the treatment of partial staghorn renal calculi in both prone split-leg positions versus GMSV positions with regard to; technical aspects, success rate, operative time, complications, safety, and effectiveness of both approaches. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between October 2018 and August 2021, 66 patients with partial staghorn calculi were enrolled in this prospective comparative study. Patients were randomly divided according to a 1:1 ratio into two groups. Group A included 33 patients who were treated by (ECIRS) in the prone split-leg position, and group B included 33 patients who were treated by (ECIRS) in the Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia (GMSV) position. RESULTS: No significant statistical difference between both groups regarding the mean age (p = 0.448), mean body mass index (BMI) (p = 0.137), mean stone burden (p = 0.435), mean operative time (p = 0.541) and the number of calyces located in branched stones (p = 0.628). The mean hospital stay was 6.71 ± 1.12 days for group A and 6.66 ± 1.10 days for group B patients (p = 0.724). The final SFR was achieved in (29)87.87% and (30)90.9% of group A & B patients, respectively (p = 0.694). No significant difference was detected between both groups in perioperative complication rates. CONCLUSION: ECIRS is safe and effective in treating partial staghorn calculi either in the prone split-leg position or in the Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia position, with comparable outcomes and no statistically significant difference between both positions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9583483 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95834832022-10-21 Endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in the prone split-leg position versus Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia position for the management of partial staghorn calculi Abouelgreed, Tamer A. Abdelaal, Mohamed A. Amin, Moamen M. Elatreisy, Adel Shalkamy, Osama Abdrabuh, Abdrabuh M. Ghoneimy, Osama M. Aboutaleb, Hamdy BMC Urol Research OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the outcome of ECIRS in the treatment of partial staghorn renal calculi in both prone split-leg positions versus GMSV positions with regard to; technical aspects, success rate, operative time, complications, safety, and effectiveness of both approaches. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between October 2018 and August 2021, 66 patients with partial staghorn calculi were enrolled in this prospective comparative study. Patients were randomly divided according to a 1:1 ratio into two groups. Group A included 33 patients who were treated by (ECIRS) in the prone split-leg position, and group B included 33 patients who were treated by (ECIRS) in the Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia (GMSV) position. RESULTS: No significant statistical difference between both groups regarding the mean age (p = 0.448), mean body mass index (BMI) (p = 0.137), mean stone burden (p = 0.435), mean operative time (p = 0.541) and the number of calyces located in branched stones (p = 0.628). The mean hospital stay was 6.71 ± 1.12 days for group A and 6.66 ± 1.10 days for group B patients (p = 0.724). The final SFR was achieved in (29)87.87% and (30)90.9% of group A & B patients, respectively (p = 0.694). No significant difference was detected between both groups in perioperative complication rates. CONCLUSION: ECIRS is safe and effective in treating partial staghorn calculi either in the prone split-leg position or in the Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia position, with comparable outcomes and no statistically significant difference between both positions. BioMed Central 2022-10-20 /pmc/articles/PMC9583483/ /pubmed/36266713 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-022-01115-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Abouelgreed, Tamer A. Abdelaal, Mohamed A. Amin, Moamen M. Elatreisy, Adel Shalkamy, Osama Abdrabuh, Abdrabuh M. Ghoneimy, Osama M. Aboutaleb, Hamdy Endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in the prone split-leg position versus Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia position for the management of partial staghorn calculi |
title | Endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in the prone split-leg position versus Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia position for the management of partial staghorn calculi |
title_full | Endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in the prone split-leg position versus Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia position for the management of partial staghorn calculi |
title_fullStr | Endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in the prone split-leg position versus Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia position for the management of partial staghorn calculi |
title_full_unstemmed | Endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in the prone split-leg position versus Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia position for the management of partial staghorn calculi |
title_short | Endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in the prone split-leg position versus Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia position for the management of partial staghorn calculi |
title_sort | endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in the prone split-leg position versus galdakao-modified supine valdivia position for the management of partial staghorn calculi |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9583483/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36266713 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-022-01115-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT abouelgreedtamera endoscopiccombinedintrarenalsurgeryinthepronesplitlegpositionversusgaldakaomodifiedsupinevaldiviapositionforthemanagementofpartialstaghorncalculi AT abdelaalmohameda endoscopiccombinedintrarenalsurgeryinthepronesplitlegpositionversusgaldakaomodifiedsupinevaldiviapositionforthemanagementofpartialstaghorncalculi AT aminmoamenm endoscopiccombinedintrarenalsurgeryinthepronesplitlegpositionversusgaldakaomodifiedsupinevaldiviapositionforthemanagementofpartialstaghorncalculi AT elatreisyadel endoscopiccombinedintrarenalsurgeryinthepronesplitlegpositionversusgaldakaomodifiedsupinevaldiviapositionforthemanagementofpartialstaghorncalculi AT shalkamyosama endoscopiccombinedintrarenalsurgeryinthepronesplitlegpositionversusgaldakaomodifiedsupinevaldiviapositionforthemanagementofpartialstaghorncalculi AT abdrabuhabdrabuhm endoscopiccombinedintrarenalsurgeryinthepronesplitlegpositionversusgaldakaomodifiedsupinevaldiviapositionforthemanagementofpartialstaghorncalculi AT ghoneimyosamam endoscopiccombinedintrarenalsurgeryinthepronesplitlegpositionversusgaldakaomodifiedsupinevaldiviapositionforthemanagementofpartialstaghorncalculi AT aboutalebhamdy endoscopiccombinedintrarenalsurgeryinthepronesplitlegpositionversusgaldakaomodifiedsupinevaldiviapositionforthemanagementofpartialstaghorncalculi |