We have located links that may give you full text access.
Mini and Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Obese Patients. Results from a Single-surgeon Large Series.
European urology open science. 2024 May
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the recommended treatment for large or complex renal stones. This study aims to evaluate the outcomes of mini PCNL in obese and nonobese patients and to compare the outcomes of mini and standard PCNL in the obese population.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our PCNL database to identify patients who had undergone mini (Amplatz sheath size 17.5Ch) or standard (Amplatz sheath size ≥26Ch) PCNL between 2005 and 2022. First, we compared the outcomes of the two procedures in the obese (body mass index [BMI] ≥30) and nonobese (BMI<30) patients. Second, we compared the outcomes of mini and standard PCNL in the obese population. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the variables associated with stone-free rate (SFR) and complications.
KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 781 patients underwent mini PCNL; there was no difference between nonobese (578) and obese (133) patients in surgical time, number of tubeless procedures, postoperative stay, SFR, and overall complication rates. Similar outcomes were also seen in the 356 patients who had undergone standard PCNL, including 276 nonobese and 80 obese patients. The comparison of mini and standard PCNL in the obese population (213 patients) showed that mini PCNL provided significant benefits in surgical time (60 vs 94 min), SFR (85% vs 63.8%), and blood transfusion rate (2% vs 10%). The multivariable analysis confirmed that mini PCNL resulted in significantly higher odds of being stone free (odds ratio [OR] 1.79) and lower odds of having a blood transfusion (OR 0.28).
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Obese patients can safely undergo either mini or standard PCNL; in this series, mini performed better than standard PCNL in terms of SFR and blood transfusion rates.
PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, we compared the outcomes of mini and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in the obese population. We found that mini PCNL had lower surgical time and blood transfusion rate, and better stone-free rate than its standard counterpart in obese patients.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our PCNL database to identify patients who had undergone mini (Amplatz sheath size 17.5Ch) or standard (Amplatz sheath size ≥26Ch) PCNL between 2005 and 2022. First, we compared the outcomes of the two procedures in the obese (body mass index [BMI] ≥30) and nonobese (BMI<30) patients. Second, we compared the outcomes of mini and standard PCNL in the obese population. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the variables associated with stone-free rate (SFR) and complications.
KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 781 patients underwent mini PCNL; there was no difference between nonobese (578) and obese (133) patients in surgical time, number of tubeless procedures, postoperative stay, SFR, and overall complication rates. Similar outcomes were also seen in the 356 patients who had undergone standard PCNL, including 276 nonobese and 80 obese patients. The comparison of mini and standard PCNL in the obese population (213 patients) showed that mini PCNL provided significant benefits in surgical time (60 vs 94 min), SFR (85% vs 63.8%), and blood transfusion rate (2% vs 10%). The multivariable analysis confirmed that mini PCNL resulted in significantly higher odds of being stone free (odds ratio [OR] 1.79) and lower odds of having a blood transfusion (OR 0.28).
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Obese patients can safely undergo either mini or standard PCNL; in this series, mini performed better than standard PCNL in terms of SFR and blood transfusion rates.
PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, we compared the outcomes of mini and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in the obese population. We found that mini PCNL had lower surgical time and blood transfusion rate, and better stone-free rate than its standard counterpart in obese patients.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app