全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

Supine Versus Prone: A Comparison of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Outcomes in Obese Patients

DOI: 10.4236/oju.2025.157028, PP. 263-275

Keywords: Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy, Obesity, Supine Position, Prone Position, Kidney Stones

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

Introduction: Obesity increases both the incidence of nephrolithiasis and the technical challenges of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Evidence comparing supine and prone PCNL in obese patients remains scarce, with only one prior study worldwide. We compared perioperative outcomes of the two positions in the largest Asian obesespecific cohort to date. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all adults with body mass index > 30 kg/m2 who underwent unilateral PCNL at Sarawak General Hospital and Sarawak Heart Centre between May 2020 and April 2023. Patients who had bilateral PCNL or concomitant procedures were excluded. Pre-operative non-contrast CT defined stone burden and Guy Stone Score; operative variables, outcomes and complications were extracted from the records and analysed. Results: A total of 124 patients were analysed (supine n = 79; prone n = 45). Baseline age, sex, BMI and ASA classification were similar, but the prone group harboured larger stones (mean surface area 11.04 vs 5.68 cm2, p < 0.001) and more Guy stone score 4 cases. Mean operative time was significantly shorter in the supine position (96.9 ± 46.7 min) than in the prone position (159.6 ± 66.7 min; p < 0.001), the difference was most pronounced in Guy stone score 2 and 3 cases. This represents an approximate 63-minute operative time reduction with the supine approach. Stonefree rates (67.1% supine vs 68.9% prone; p = 0.837), overall treatment success (81% vs 73.3%; p = 0.319), transfusion (2.6% vs 8.9%; p = 0.113), complications (p = 0.134) and hospital stay (2.3 ± 1.6 vs 2.6 ± 1.9 days; p = 0.378) were similar. In Guy stone score 4 cases, the prone group showed a non-significant trend toward higher clearance. Conclusion: In obese patients, supine and prone PCNL provide equivalent safety and stoneclearance outcomes. Supine positioning offers a substantial operativetime advantage for low to moderate complexity stones, whereas the prone approach remains a viable option for very large or staghorn calculi when multiple tract access is anticipated.

References

[1]  Carron, M., Safaee Fakhr, B., Ieppariello, G. and Foletto, M. (2020) Perioperative Care of the Obese Patient. British Journal of Surgery, 107, e39-e55.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.11447
[2]  Chong, C.T., Lai, W.K., Zainuddin, A.A., Pardi, M., Mohd Sallehuddin, S. and Ganapathy, S.S. (2022) Prevalence of Obesity and Its Associated Factors among Malaysian Adults: Finding from the National Health and Morbidity Survey 2019. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health, 34, 786-792.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10105395221129113
[3]  Shavit, L., Ferraro, P.M., Johri, N., Robertson, W., Walsh, S.B., Moochhala, S., et al. (2014) Effect of Being Overweight on Urinary Metabolic Risk Factors for Kidney Stone Formation. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, 30, 607-613.
https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfu350
[4]  Trinchieri, A., Croppi, E. and Montanari, E. (2016) Obesity and Urolithiasis: Evidence of Regional Influences. Urolithiasis, 45, 271-278.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-016-0908-3
[5]  Anwar, A., Uz Zaman, H., Haseeb, S.A., Ahmad, H., Awalrehman, and Khan, I. (2024) Association between Obesity and Risk of Kidney Stones: Exploring the Rule of Life Style Factors. Innovative Research in Applied, Biological and Chemical Sciences, 2, 91-95.
https://doi.org/10.62497/irabcs.2024.43
[6]  Crivelli, J.J., Redden, D.T., Johnson, R.D., Juarez, L.D., Maalouf, N.M., Hughes, A.E., et al. (2022) Associations of Obesity and Neighborhood Factors with Urinary Stone Parameters. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 63, S93-S102.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2022.01.033
[7]  Perumal, K.R., Chua, R.H.B., Teh, G.C. and Lei, C.C.M. (2022) Prevalence of Urolithiasis in Sarawak and Associated Risk Factors: An Ultrasonagraphy-Based Cross‐sectional Study. BJUI Compass, 4, 74-80.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bco2.152
[8]  Müller, M.J. (2013) From BMI to Functional Body Composition. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 67, 1119-1121.
https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2013.174
[9]  Assimos, D., Krambeck, A., Miller, N.L., Monga, M., Murad, M.H., Nelson, C.P., et al. (2016) Surgical Management of Stones: American Urological Association/endourological Society Guideline, PART II. Journal of Urology, 196, 1161-1169.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.05.091
[10]  Türk, C., Petřík, A., Sarica, K., Seitz, C., Skolarikos, A., Straub, M., et al. (2016) EAU Guidelines on Interventional Treatment for Urolithiasis. European Urology, 69, 475-482.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.041
[11]  Hassan, M., El-Nahas, A.R., Sheir, K.Z., El-Tabey, N.A., El-Assmy, A.M., Elshal, A.M., et al. (2015) Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy vs. Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy for Treating a 20-30 mm Single Renal Pelvic Stone. Arab Journal of Urology, 13, 212-216.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2015.04.002
[12]  Bryniarski, P., Paradysz, A., Zyczkowski, M., Kupilas, A., Nowakowski, K. and Bogacki, R. (2012) A Randomized Controlled Study to Analyze the Safety and Efficacy of Percutaneous Nephrolithotripsy and Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery in the Management of Renal Stones More than 2 cm in Diameter. Journal of Endourology, 26, 52-57.
https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2011.0235
[13]  De, S., Autorino, R., Kim, F.J., Zargar, H., Laydner, H., Balsamo, R., et al. (2015) Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy versus Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. European Urology, 67, 125-137.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.07.003
[14]  Zhou, X., Sun, X., Chen, X., Gong, X., Yang, Y., Chen, C., et al. (2017) Effect of Obesity on Outcomes of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Renal Stone Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Urologia Internationalis, 98, 382-390.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000455162
[15]  Mak, D.K., Smith, Y., Buchholz, N. and El-Husseiny, T. (2016) What Is Better in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy—Prone or Supine? A Systematic Review. Arab Journal of Urology, 14, 101-107.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2016.01.005
[16]  Li, J., Gao, L., Li, Q., Zhang, Y. and Jiang, Q. (2019) Supine versus Prone Position for Percutaneous Nephrolithotripsy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. International Journal of Surgery, 66, 62-71.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2019.04.016
[17]  Zhao, Z., Fan, J., Liu, Y., de la Rosette, J. and Zeng, G. (2017) Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: Position, Position, Position! Urolithiasis, 46, 79-86.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-017-1019-5
[18]  Mazzucchi, E., Vicentini, F.C., Marchini, G.S., Danilovic, A., Brito, A.H. and Srougi, M. (2012) Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Obese Patients: Comparison between the Prone and Total Supine Position. Journal of Endourology, 26, 1437-1442.
https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2012.0257
[19]  Thomas, K., Smith, N.C., Hegarty, N. and Glass, J.M. (2011) The Guy’s Stone Score—Grading the Complexity of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Procedures. Urology, 78, 277-281.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2010.12.026
[20]  de la Rosette, J.J.M.C.H., Zuazu, J.R., Tsakiris, P., Elsakka, A.M., Zudaire, J.J., Laguna, M.P., et al. (2008) Prognostic Factors and Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Morbidity: A Multivariate Analysis of a Contemporary Series Using the Clavien Classification. Journal of Urology, 180, 2489-2493.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.08.025

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133