Role of Laparoscopy in Management of Renal Stones: Single-Center Experience and Review of Literature

Nambirajan, Thiagarajan; Jeschke, Stephan; Albqami, Nasser; Abukora, Firas; Leeb, Karl; Janetschek, Günter

doi:10.1089/end.2005.19.353

Cited by 82 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Jagdish Chander et al [12] reported a mean age of 33.74 years (18-60 yrs) in the group used in their study. Thiagarajan Nambarajan et al [13] reported a mean age of 51 yr in their study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Laparoscopic retroperitoneal pyelolithotomy and open pyelolithotomy: a comparative study

Patloo¹,

Sarmast²,

Khan³

et al. 2012

Turkish Journal of Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To compare the outcomes of laparoscopic pyelolithotomy and open pyelolithotomy at a single center in terms of operative time, blood loss, intra-and post-operative complications, analgesia requirements, hospital stay, convalescence and cosmesis. Material and methods:This prospective randomized study was conducted in the Department of Surgery of the Government Medical College Srinagar between May 2008 and September 2010. Sixty patients underwent pyelolithotomy during this period, including both open pyelolithotomy (n=30) and laparoscopic retroperitoneal pyelolithotomy (n=30). All patients (age >14 yr) with large (>1.5 cm) renal pelvic stones who met the inclusion criteria were included in the study. The decision to perform open or laparoscopic pyelolithotomy was made randomly by a computer program. Results:The majority of our patients in both study groups were in the 21-40 yr age group. The mean operative time was significantly less (p<0.001) in the open group than in the laparoscopic group (74.83 min vs. 94.43 min). The mean blood loss was less in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (73 mL vs. 103 mL); however, this difference was not statistically significant. In the laparoscopic group, both the resumption of oral intake (10.33 hrs vs. 15.60 hrs) and the drain removal (2.7 days vs. 3 days) occurred earlier, although these differences were not significant. Intraoperative complications occurred more frequently in the laparoscopic group (16% versus 6.66%); however, all of the complications were minor and were managed intraoperatively in the same sitting. There was no statistically significant difference in the postoperative pain scores or analgesia requirements, and postoperative complications were only slightly more frequent in the laparoscopic group in our study. The mean hospital stay in the open group was 5.2 days, while the mean stay of the laparoscopic group was 3.8 days (p<0.03). Patients in the laparoscopic group returned to their routine activities significantly earlier (1.78 vs. 3.83 wks) than did patients in the open group (p<0.001). Conclusion:Laparoscopic retroperitoneal pyelolithotomy for upper urinary tract calculi is superior to open surgery because of the significantly reduced hospital stays and cosmetic outcomes of patients who underwent the laparoscopic surgery. Although the reductions of analgesia requirements and blood loss were not statistically significant in our study, the data still favored the laparoscopic procedure. Disadvantages of retroperitoneal laparoscopy include the decreased working space, the cost of equipment and the availability of a trained surgeon.

show abstract

“…Jagdish Chander et al [12] reported a mean age of 33.74 years (18-60 yrs) in the group used in their study. Thiagarajan Nambarajan et al [13] reported a mean age of 51 yr in their study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Laparoscopic retroperitoneal pyelolithotomy and open pyelolithotomy: a comparative study

Patloo¹,

Sarmast²,

Khan³

et al. 2012

Turkish Journal of Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Birçok çalışmayla etkinliği gösterilmiş, taşsızlık oranı %71-100 ve açığa dönüş oranı %0-27 arasında bildirilmiştir (11)(12)(13). Gaur'un retroperitoneal boşlukta balon dilatasyonunu bulması ürolojik laparoskopinin gelişmesine büyük katkıda bulunmuştur (14 enfekte idrarın peritoneal boşluk ve organlarla teması gibi bir riski mevcuttur.…”

Section: Böbrek Taşlarıunclassified

“…Gaur'un retroperitoneal boşlukta balon dilatasyonunu bulması ürolojik laparoskopinin gelişmesine büyük katkıda bulunmuştur (14 enfekte idrarın peritoneal boşluk ve organlarla teması gibi bir riski mevcuttur. Buna karşın transabdominal yolla yapılan girişimlerde herhangi bir önemli komplikasyon gelişmediği-ni bildiren çalışmalar da mevcuttur (15,16). Transperitoneal yaklaşımla barsak motilitesinin geç kazanıldığı, analjezik ihtiyacının, ileus ve hastanede kalış sürelerinin daha fazla olduğu gösterilmiştir (17).…”

Section: Böbrek Taşlarıunclassified

Taş Hastalığında Açık ve Laparoskopik Cerrahinin Yeri Var Mı?

Şahin¹,

Tuğcu²

2016

Endouroloji

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Laparoscopic surgery has been successfully introduced in the treatment of urinary tract stone disease, with major applications for ureteral calculli and treatment of Ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) anomaly or caliceal diverticula (55,56).…”

Section: Urologic Laparoscopy Drainagementioning

confidence: 99%

The final stage of the laparoscopic procedure: exploring final steps

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODuCTIONUrologic surgery continues to evolve focusing efforts on adequate treatment of pathologic urologic conditions in a safe and minimally invasive manner (1).Laparoscopic surgery has well defined benefits for the patient and has, over time, become accepted as a standard of care access strategy for the management of benign and malignant Urologic diseases. Despite significant advances in laparoscopic technique and technologies, laparoscopic Urologic surgery remains technically demanding. Unlike open surgery, at the end of laparoscopic extirpative procedures, the Urologist is often faced with the additional challenges of specimen retrieval and extraction.Laparoscopic specimen entrapment and extraction occur at what is falsely considered the "end of the procedure". During open surgery, after the specimen has been mobilized, the specimen is Despite significant advances in laparoscopic technique and technologies, laparoscopic Urologic surgery remains technically demanding regarding various surgical steps including the challenge of specimen retrieval and extraction, whether to install a drainage system and the best option for wound closure. Laparoscopic specimen entrapment and extraction occurs at what is falsely considered the "end of the procedure". During open surgery, after the specimen has been mobilized, the specimen is simply lifted out of the larger incision which has been made to achieve the surgical objectives. In contrast, significant laparoscopic skill is required to entrap and safely extract laparoscopic specimens. Indeed, the Urologist and surgical team which are transitioning from open surgery may disregard this important part of the procedure which may lead to significant morbidity. As such, it is imperative that during laparoscopic procedures, the "end of the procedure" be strictly defined as the termination of skin closure and dressing placement. Taking a few minutes to focus on safe specimen entrapment and extraction will substantially reduce major morbidity. The following review focus on the technology and technique of specimen entrapment and extraction, on the matter of whether to install a drainage system of the abdominal cavity and the options for adequate closure of trocar site wounds. This article's primary objectives are to focus on how to minimize morbidity while maintain the advantages of a minimally invasive surgical approach.

show abstract

Role of Laparoscopy in Management of Renal Stones: Single-Center Experience and Review of Literature

Abstract: Laparoscopic surgery is effective for complex renal stones and allows for adjunctive procedures. It can also be an alternative to percutaneous nephrolithotomy. It complements other minimally invasive procedures, and a need for open stone surgery should be rare in the future.

Cited by 82 publications

References 32 publications

Laparoscopic retroperitoneal pyelolithotomy and open pyelolithotomy: a comparative study

Laparoscopic retroperitoneal pyelolithotomy and open pyelolithotomy: a comparative study

Taş Hastalığında Açık ve Laparoskopik Cerrahinin Yeri Var Mı?

The final stage of the laparoscopic procedure: exploring final steps

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About