Comparative Evaluation of Upper Pole and Non-Upper Pole Puncture Techniques in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL): A Retrospective Analysis of Efficacy and Safety Parameters
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61919/jhrr.v4i1.497Keywords:
Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy, PCNL, Upper Pole Puncture, Non-Upper Pole Puncture, Renal Calculi, Stone Clearance, Kidney Stones, Minimally Invasive Surgery, Urology, EndourologyAbstract
Background: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is a critical intervention in the management of large renal calculi, with the choice of calyx puncture technique impacting the efficacy and safety of the procedure. While the upper pole approach is associated with better visualization and stone clearance, it is used with caution due to a perceived increase in complication rates.
Objective: This study aimed to compare the upper pole calyx puncture technique's efficacy and safety with that of the non-upper pole (middle and lower) puncture techniques in PCNL.
Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 173 patients who underwent PCNL at the Urology and Transplant Unit A of The Institute of Kidney Diseases in Peshawar from January 2017 to December 2020. Data on demographics, stone characteristics, perioperative findings, and postoperative outcomes were collected. Statistical significance was determined using Chi-square tests with SPSS version 25.
Results: The average stone size was 21.38 mm (±11.2 mm) overall, with the upper pole group presenting a smaller average size of 19.8 mm (±7.6 mm) compared to 21.55 mm (±10.8 mm) for the non-upper pole group (p=0.032). Pre-operative hemoglobin levels were slightly lower in the upper pole group (12.5 ± 1.8 mg/dl) than in the non-upper pole group (12.9 ± 1.8 mg/dl, p=0.007). Complete clearance rates were comparable between groups. Post-operative blood transfusion was required more frequently in the non-upper pole group (12.1%, n=12) versus the upper pole group (4.0%, n=3, p=0.04).
Conclusion: The upper pole approach in PCNL may afford a higher rate of stone clearance and reduced operative times with acceptable safety when compared to non-upper pole approaches. The selection of puncture technique should be tailored to individual patient anatomy and stone characteristics, with consideration given to the surgeon's experience and skill.
Downloads
References
Amaresh PHM, Chawla A, de la Rosette JJMCH, Laguna MP, Kriplani A. Safety and efficacy of superior calyceal access versus inferior calyceal access for pelvic and/or lower calyceal renal calculi- a prospective observational comparative study. World J Urol. 2021;39(6):2155-61.
Singh R, Kankalia SP, Sabale V, Satav V, Mane D, Mulay A, et al. Comparative evaluation of upper versus lower calyceal approach in percutaneous nephrolithotomy for managing complex renal calculi. Urol Ann. 2015;7(1):31-5.
Ganpule AP, Vijayakumar M, Malpani A, Desai MR. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) a critical review. Int J Surg. 2016;36(Pt D):660-4.
Huang T, Jiao BB, Luo ZK, Zhao H, Geng L, Zhang G. Evidence of the outcome and safety of upper pole vs. other pole access single puncture PCNL for kidney stones: which is better? Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2023;27(10):4406-20.
Gunawan S, Rasyid N, Atmoko W. Outcome and safety of upper pole versus non-upper pole single puncture PCNL for staghorn stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis. F1000Research. 2019;8:537.
Pansota MSR, Saleem MS, Tabassum A. Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Upper Versus Lower Pole Calyx Puncture. J Postgrad Med Inst. 2020;33(4).
Raza A, Moussa S, Smith G, Tolley DA. Upper-pole puncture in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a retrospective review of treatment safety and efficacy. BJU Int. 2008;101(5):599-602.
Honey RJ, Wiesenthal JD, Ghiculete D, Pace S, Ray AA, Pace KT. Comparison of supracostal versus infracostal percutaneous nephrolithotomy using the novel prone-flexed patient position. J Endourol. 2011;25(6):947-54.
Aron M, Goel R, Kesarwani PK, Seth A, Gupta NP. Upper pole access for complex lower pole renal calculi. BJU Int. 2004;94(6):849-52.
Netto NR Jr, Ikonomidis J, Ikari O, Claro JA. Comparative study of percutaneous access for staghorn calculi. Urology. 2005;65(4):659-62.
Tefekli A, Karadag MA, Tepeler K, Sari E, Berberoglu Y, Baykal M, et al. Classification of percutaneous nephrolithotomy complications using the modified clavien grading system: looking for a standard. Eur Urol. 2008;53(1):184-90.
Sampaio FJ, Zanier JF, Aragao AH, Favorito LA. Intrarenal access: 3-dimensional anatomical study. J Urol. 1992;148(6):1769-73.
Memon WA, Khalid SE, Haider A, Saulat S, Khan SA, Quddus MB, et al. Comparative evaluation of upper versus lower calyceal approach in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for managing renal calculi. J Pak Med Assoc. 2021;71(2(B)):602-7.
Sukumar S, Nair B, Ginil KP, Sanjeevan KV, Sanjay BH. Supracostal access for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: less morbid, more effective. Int Urol Nephrol. 2008;40(2):263-7.
Gupta R, Kumar A, Kapoor R, Srivastava A, Mandhani A. Prospective evaluation of safety and efficacy of the supracostal approach for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. BJU Int. 2002;90(9):809-13.
Gokce MI, Mazzon G, Nguyen D, Perez BM, Ibis MA, Zeng G, et al. Navigating Entire Collecting System During Supine Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Is Rigid Nephroscopy Enough? A Prospective Study by International Alliance of Urolithiasis Supine Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Working Group. Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques. 2024.
Irani D, Haghpanah A, Rasekhi A, Kamran H, Rahmanian M, Hosseini MM, et al. Predictive factors of delayed bleeding after percutaneous nephrolithotomy requiring angioembolization. BJUI compass. 2024;5(1):76-83.
Kumar N, Somani B. Supine tubeless upper pole PCNL under spinal anaesthesia: Safety, feasibility and outcomes from a tertiary endourology centre. Arab Journal of Urology. 2024:1-7.
Luangtangvarodom P, Tangpaitoon T, Liwrotsap C. Renal calyx access does not affect intraoperative blood loss in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a single-center retrospective study. Insight Urology. 2022;43(1):51-7.
Meng W, Zhang H, Wang J, Chen B, Jiang Z, Ma L, et al. Retrospective study of single-use digital flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy versus miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy for 1.5–2.5 cm lower pole renal stones. International Urology and Nephrology. 2024;56(1):55-62.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Ahmad Nawaz, Sulaiman Shah, Muzzamil Sohail, Muhammad Idrees Khan, Amir Ullah
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Public Licensing Terms
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Under this license:
- You are free to share (copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) for any purpose, including commercial use.
- Attribution must be given to the original author(s) and source in a manner that is reasonable and does not imply endorsement.
- No additional restrictions may be applied that conflict with the terms of this license.
For more details, visit: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
