Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: yes but when? A multicentre retrospective cohort study

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorRifaioglu, Murat M.
dc.contributor.authorOnem, Kadir
dc.contributor.authorBuldu, Ibrahim
dc.contributor.authorKaratag, Tuna
dc.contributor.authorIstanbulluoglu, Mustafa Okan
dc.date.accessioned2024-09-18T21:00:24Z
dc.date.available2024-09-18T21:00:24Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.departmentHatay Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractThe aim of our study is to determine the predictive factors for placement of percutaneous nephrostomy tube (PNT) in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) procedure and to evaluate the optimal cutoff points of the predictive factors. 229 patients, who had undergone percutaneous nephrolithotomy operation between February 2009 and February 2013 were reviewed retrospectively. Five patients were excluded from the study because of solitary kidney. All characteristics of 224 patients, stones and operative data were investigated. Patient and stone-related factors, such as age, BMI, history of previous surgery or SWL, characteristics of the stone, renal parenchymal thickness (RPT), as well as procedural factors, such as percutaneous access number and location were analyzed by univariate and multivariate tests. The continuous variables were analyzed using Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. There were no differences in sex, age, BMI and hemoglobin decrease between the groups. Previous operation status, RPT, stone size, multiplicity of the stone, stone localization, blood transfusion presence, access points, access number and operation time were found statistically different according to univariate analysis. Multivariate analysis showed that RPT, operation time and stone size were the independent factors that affected the PNT insertion. For RPT, operation time and stone size, the optimal cutoff points for insertion PNT were 13.75 mm, 75.5 min and 890 mm(2), respectively. Tubeless PCNL should be chosen in patients with stone area less than 890 mm(2), and parenchymal thickness thicker than 13.75 mm and procedure with operation period < 75.5 min.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00240-014-0638-3
dc.identifier.endpage262en_US
dc.identifier.issn2194-7228
dc.identifier.issn2194-7236
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.pmid24468916en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84904706874en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2en_US
dc.identifier.startpage255en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-014-0638-3
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12483/12661
dc.identifier.volume42en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000336383500010en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherSpringeren_US
dc.relation.ispartofUrolithiasisen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectTubelessen_US
dc.subjectPercutaneous nephrolithotomyen_US
dc.subjectRenal parenchymal thicknessen_US
dc.subjectOperation timeen_US
dc.subjectStone sizeen_US
dc.subjectCutoff pointen_US
dc.titleTubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: yes but when? A multicentre retrospective cohort studyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Orijinal paket
Listeleniyor 1 - 1 / 1
[ N/A ]
İsim:
Tam Metin / Full Text
Boyut:
261.89 KB
Biçim:
Adobe Portable Document Format
İndir

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu