Urolithiasis ranks second among urological diseases, after inflammatory processes, and first among surgical interventions in urological hospitals. The problem of this disease treatment is a long-term rehabilitation and disablement, which entails a significant increase in costs and requires changes in the tactics of treatment of patients. Since its introduction until today, percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the standard treatment for nephrolithiasis with a stone size of more than 1.5–2.0 cm. In its standard version, PCNL ends with the placement of nephrostomy catheter through the formed parenchymal channel, but there are techniques of the surgery completion either without nephrostomy catheter with a JJ stent – tubeless PCNL, or without nephrostomy and JJ stent at all – totally tubeless PCNL. However, nowadays, the use of tubeless and totally tubeless techniques is one of the most controversial topics in percutaneous nephrolithotomy in terms of safety and efficacy in their application. Aim. To analyze the results and safety of percutaneous nephrolithotomy by means of tubeless and totally tubeless techniques based on scientific evidence. Analysis of the scientific literature shows that tubeless and totally tubeless PCNL techniques are a safe method of percutaneous surgery and their application reduces pain and analgesic requirements in the postoperative period, shortens the length of postoperative hospital stay, and enhances recovery after surgery in patients, therefore resulting in cost-saving treatment. Conclusions. Tubeless and totally tubeless PCNLs are recommended for widespread use in urological practice, but it is worth to mention that these techniques should be performed in selected patients and by an operating surgeon with significant experience in percutaneous surgery.

The objective: evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of percutaneous nephrolithotripsy in patients in the supine position. Materials and methods. For the period 2017–2021, 521 mini-PNL were performed according to the standard technique, where in 458 (87,9%) cases the operation was performed in the patient’s prone position, and in 63 (12,1%) cases on the supine position (group 1). The control group (2 group) consisted of 70 patients, sporadically selected among 458 patients to whom PML performed in a standard prone position. Mini-PNL was performed under combined regional (spinal-epidural) anesthesia in 98,7% (514) cases, in 1,3% (7) under endotrachial anesthesia. Results. The average time of surgery was 41,1±11,4 minutes in the 1st group and 57,4±10,3 minutes in the 2nd group (р<0,05), due to the lack of need to revolutionize the patient on the abdomen. Statistically greater (p<0,05) of the ability to perform/ additional percutaneous access in patients in the supaine position. Infectious complications (9,5 vs. 7,1%; p>0,05), stone-free conditions (96,4 vs. 98,2%; p>0,05) and average hospital stays (2,3 vs. 2,2 days; p>0,05). None of the patients in both groups had complications higher than Clavien IIIa. When performing PNL in the supine position, in contrast to performing PNL on the prone position, there is always the possibility of using combined endoscopic methods. Where 3 (4,8%) patients underwent combined retro- and antegrade approaches for combination of nephrolithiasis with «wedged» calculi of the pyelourethral segment and in distal ureter, and retrograde laser endoureterotomy was performed in one (1,6%) patient. The limitation of our study includes a small sample size and a lack of group randomization. Conclusions. The patient’s position on the supine position, during the implementation of PNL, is a safe technique and can be a particularly attractive option for the category of patients with high anesthesiological risk; in the case of planned simultane (transurethral and percutaneous) interventions on the UMP; in patients who are obese or with severe deformityof the spine.

Національна медична академія післядипломної освіти імені П.Л. Шупика, м. Київ Сечокам'яна хвороба (СКХ) була і залишається однією з найактуальніших проблем сучасної урології. В урологічних клініках кількість пацієнтів досягає 20-40% від загальної кількості хворих. Половину з них становлять пацієнти з каменями у сечоводі. Обструкція сечоводу конкрементом веде до порушення відтоку сечі з нирки, приєднання обструктивного пієлонефриту, розвитку уретерогідронефрозу аж до повної втрати функції нирки. Видалення великих конкрементів, особливо тих, що тривалий час знаходяться в сечоводі, є серйозною проблемою в урології. Існує декілька методів оперативного лікування уретеролітіазу: екстракорпоральна ударнохвильова уретеролітотрипсія (еУХЛ), контактна уретеролітотрипсія (КУЛТ), уретеролітоекстракція, черезшкірна нефролітотрипсія (при переміщенні каменя із сечоводу в нирку). Альтернативою цим методам є лапароскопічна уретеролітотомія. Мета дослідження: аналіз ефективності лапароскопічної уретеролітотомії при лікуванні великих та зафіксованих каменів сечоводу. Матеріали та методи. За період з 2014 до 2019 р. у клініці дУ «Інститут урології НАмН України» було виконано 43 лапароскопічних уретеролітотомій. Розміри конкрементів становили від 15 до 25 мм. У 32 (74,4%) пацієнтів камені локалізувалися у верхній третині сечоводу, в 11 (25,6%)-у середній третині. Конкременти знаходились у сечоводі від 2 міс до двох років. В 11 пацієнтів камені були рецидивними, у 41 (95%) на боці локалізації конкременту розвинувся уретерогідронефроз, 8 пацієнтам до надходження в клініку була виконана еУХЛ, трьом-КУЛТ, які виявилися неефективними. Тридцяти двом (74,4%) хворим лапароскопічна уретеролітотомія була проведена як первинний метод лікування. Результати. За результатами проведеної операції камені у всіх пацієнтів були видалені повністю. Конверсій, інтраопераційних ускладнень не було. Післяопераційний ліжко-день становив від 3 до 5 діб. Через 1,5 міс після проведеного оперативного втручання функція нирок у всіх хворих повністю відновилась, уретерогідронефрозу та рецидивів каменеутворення не виявлено. Заключення. Ураховуючи малу травматичність лапароскопічної уретеролітотомії, можливість одномоментного повного видалення конкрементів, гладкий перебіг післяопераційного періоду, цей метод повинен бути операцією вибору за наявністю великих каменів та каменів, що тривалий час знаходяться в сечоводі, а також при неефективності еУХЛ, КУЛТ тощо. Ключові слова : уретеролітіаз, лапароскопічна уретеролітотомія. Efficacy of laparoscopic uretherolithotomy in the treatment of large and fixed ureteral stones О.V. Shuliak, V.A. Slobodyanyuk, М.D. Sosnin Urolithiasis has been and remains one of the most pressing problems in modern urology. In urological clinics, the number of such patients reaches 20-40% of the total number of patients. Half of them are patients with ureteral stones. Obstruction of the ureter with stones leads to impaired outflow of urine from the kidney, the accession of obstructive pyelonephritis, the development of ureterohydronephrosis unti...

Annotation. Global medical literature shows an ever-increasing number of patients suffering from urolithiasis and malignant kidney tumors. The number of patients suffering from both conditions also seems to be on the rise. Correlation and interdependence, as well as the preferable course of treatment for these diseases, remain uncertain. The present study aims to map out treatment strategies for patients presenting with both urolithiasis and kidney tumor. In 2013- 2021 21 patients with urolithiasis and kidney tumor were examined and treated in the SI “Acad. O.F. Vozianov Institute of Urology NAMS of Ukraine”. In 61.9% of cases a tumor and calculi were located unilaterally, in 14.3% contralaterally, and in other 14.3% tumor was comorbid with bilateral urolithiasis. 4.75% of patients had a tumor combined with a stone in the upper third of the ureter on the same side, and 4.75% – in the lower third of the ureter on the opposite side. Depending on the localization of a tumor and a stone, the stage of the oncological process, the presence of metastases, clinical manifestations, etc, different treatment tactics have been employed. Simultaneous removal of a kidney tumor and a stone in case of their ipsilateral location was performed in 52.4% of patients. We prioritized organ-sparing surgery in all cases. 9.52% of patients underwent PNLT before the tumor removal. In 9.52% of patients ureterolith removal was followed by kidney tumor removal. 71.4% of patients underwent successful laparoscopic resection of a tumorous kidney, but in 28.6% of patients, attempts to save the organ failed. So, types of combinations of urolithiasis and kidney tumor can be different, hence, it is necessary to apply individual treatment tactics in each case. If the functional state of a tumorous kidney and technical capacity allow it, organ-sparing surgery is highly advisable.

Urolithiasis is one of the most common disease encountered in the daily practice of a urologist. Depending on the severity of the course, patients with urolithiasis and, in particular, kidney stones, are often required to have the surgical treatment. The greater problem is deemed to be staghorn nephrolithiasis and the choice of the optimal surgical technique for the elimination of kidney stones. The objective: to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combined method of fragmentation of coral kidney stones in comparison with standard ultrasound lithotripsy. Materials and methods. A total of 352 percutaneous nephrolithotripsies (PCNL) were performed: 187 (53,1%) – patients who were diagnosed with staghorn calculi. The age of the patients ranged from 26 to 66 (mean age 42,5 years). There were 89 men and 98 women. 78 (41.7%) patients had previously undergone surgical treatment (open surgery or PCNL) of kidney stones, in which recurrent staghorn stones were subsequently identified. Nine (4,8%) patients had bilateral coral calculi. The size of the stone varied from 3,5 to 11,0 cm. Their density ranged from 300 to 1500 Hounsfield units. The most frequent complication of the underlying disease was chronic pyelonephritis – 145 (77,5%) patients. Hydronephrosis on the affected side was diagnosed in 98 (52,4%) patients. A combined pneumatic and ultrasonic lithotripter ShockPulse-SE from Olympus (Japan) was used for breaking kidney stones. We performed PCNL in a combined mode in 41 (21,9%) patients with staghorn nephrolithiasis. Results. In the group of patients using combined pneumatic and ultrasonic lithotripsy, complete removal of the staghorn calculus was achieved in 97,6% of cases (in 40 of 41 patients), whereas in the opposite group, using an ultrasonic lithotripter only in 84,9% (in 124 of 146 patients). The duration of the PCNL operation using the ShockPulse-SE device was from 35 to 130 minutes, on average – 48±5 minutes. The duration of the surgical intervention using an ultrasound lithotripter is from 90 to 180 minutes, an average –105±7 minutes. Blood loss during PCNL using an ultrasonic lithotripter was 200–400 ml, whereas with the ShockPulse-SE apparatus – 100–200 ml. An exacerbation of pyelonephritis was noted in 7 patients (in two patients after PCNL in a combined mode and in five after PCNL using an ultrasonic lithotripter). The mean length of patient hospitalization after surgery ranged from 4 to 10 days. At the same time, the average duration after PCNL using the combined ShockPulse-SE technique was 4±1 days, while after PCNL using an ultrasonic lithotripter it was 6±1 days. Conclusions. The combined technique of lithotripsy with a combined probe for simultaneous pneumatic and ultrasound lithotripsy has shown better results in terms of safety and efficacy compared to using only an ultrasound lithotripter. Used for decades, ultrasound lithotripsy for staghorn stone PCNL is both effective and safe moreover it’s a traditional technique. Thus, in comparison with ultrasound lithotripsy, the combined technique showed a shorter operation time, with less blood loss, a shorter length of patient hospitalization and less pyelonephritis in the postoperative period, as a result of maintaining a lower intrarenal pressure gradient during the operation. At the same time, the cost of the procedure using a combined probe was estimated, which turned out to be higher than traditional ultrasound lithotripsy. The use of combined lithotripsy with simultaneous aspiration of stone fragments is an indisputable advantage of this kind of PCNL in patients with staghorn nephrolithiasis, which brings the effectiveness of this technique closer to 100%.