Objectives: To investigate the safety, efficacy, and practicability of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) with the aid of a patented irrigation clearance system in treating renal staghorn calculi. Methods: From August 2009 to July 2014, 4 hospitals had executed a prospective multicenter study with a total of 912 cases. The patients were randomly divided into 3 groups: suctioning MPCNL, standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), and traditional MPCNL groups. Multiple operative and perioperative parameters were compared. Results: Blood loss and intrapelvic pressure in the suctioning MPCNL group were significantly less than those in the standard PCNL group. The average operation time, intrapelvic pressure, and amount of bleeding in the suctioning MPCNL group were better than those in the traditional MPCNL group. The suctioning MPCNL used one tract more frequently and 2 or 3 tracts less frequently than the standard MPCNL and traditional MPCNL groups. The stone-free rate by one surgery in the suctioning MPCNL group was significantly higher than that in standard PCNL and traditional MPNCL groups. Conclusions: Suctioning MPCNL using our patented system shows several advantages in treating renal staghorn calculi, including minimal invasion, shorter operation time, lower intrapelvic pressure, less bleeding and the need for a smaller number of -percutaneous tracts, and higher stone clearance rate by one -surgery.

Keywords:
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy, Suctioning minimally invasive nephrolithotomy, Renal staghorn calculi
1.
Rodríguez D, Sacco DE: Minimally invasive surgical treatment for kidney stone disease. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis 2015; 22: 266–272.
2.
Yuhico MP, Ko R: The current status of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the management of kidney stones. Minerva Urol Nefrol 2008; 60: 159–175.
3.
Zhu W, Liu Y, Liu L, Lei M, Yuan J, Wan SP, et al: Minimally invasive versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis. Urolithiasis 2015; 43: 563–570.
4.
Li LY, Gao X, Yang M, Li JF, Zhang HB, Xu WF, et al: Does a smaller tract in percutaneous nephrolithotomy contribute to less invasiveness? A prospective comparative study. Urology 2010; 75: 56–61.
5.
Zhao Z, Cui Z, Zeng T, Wan SP, Zeng G: Comparison of 1-stage with 2-stage multiple-tracts mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the treatment of staghorn stones: a matched cohorts analysis. Urology 2016; 87: 46–51.
6.
Song L, Chen Z, Liu T, Zhong J, Qin W, Guo S, et al: The application of a patented system to minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 2011; 25: 1281–1286.
7.
Resorlu B, Kara C, Sahin E, Unsal A: Comparison of nephrostomy drainage types following percutaneous nephrolithotomy requiring multiple tracts: Single tube versus multiple tubes versus tubeless. Urol Int 2011; 87: 23–27.
8.
Wang Y, Hou Y, Jiang F, Wang Y, Chen Q, Lu Z, et al: Standard-tract combined with mini-tract in percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal staghorn calculi. Urol Int 2014; 92: 422–426.
9.
Fan D, Song L, Xie D, Hu M, Peng Z, Liao X, et al: A comparison of supracostal and infracostal access approaches in treating renal and upper ureteral stones using MPCNL with the aid of a patented system. BMC Urol 2015; 15: 102.
10.
Osman Y, El-Tabey N, Refai H, Elnahas A, Shoma A, Eraky I, et al: Detection of -residual stones after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: role of nonenhanced spiral computerized tomography. J Urol 2008; 179: 198–200.
11.
Jou YC, Lu CL, Chen FH, Shen CH, Cheng MC, Lin SH, et al: Contributing factors for fever after tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Urology 2015; 85: 527–530.
© 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel
2018
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.