Background: The last decade has seen the emergence of a variety of supine positions for carrying out percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). These positions all differ with regard to ease of puncture under image guidance, operative field availability, ability to make and dilate multiple tracts and ease of combining retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). As all of these positions have their limitations regarding the important parameters mentioned above, there is a need for a supine position which addresses some of the difficulties. Methods: We describe and illustrate our flank-free modified supine position, which we believe addresses a number of the issues. Results: Our position allows easy percutaneous access under fluoroscopy (torso only tilted to around 15°), space for placing (flank free of support) and dilating multiple tracts (kidney lies in a fairly neutral position and hence less mobile), a fairly horizontal tract allowing low intrarenal pressures and easy washout of fragments as well as allowing RIRS in a position of relative familiarity. The lesser torso rotation compared with the Valdivia, Galdakao modified and the Barts modified Valdivia positions also means it is more comfortable for patients. Conclusions: Our results are encouraging and easily comparable with published series on prone position, Valdivia, complete supine and the Barts modified Valdivia positions. We would like to highlight the Barts ‘flank-free’ modified supine position as one of the standard positions for carrying out supine PCNL.

Keywords:
Barts flank-free position, Complete supine position, Prone position, Supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy, Valdivia position
1.
Valdivia JG, Scarpa RM, Duvdevani M, Gross AJ, Nadler RB, Nutahara MD, et al: Supine versus prone position during percutaneous nephrolothotomy: a report from the clinical research office of the Endourological Society Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Global Study. J Endourol 2011;25:1619–1625.
2.
Ray A, Chung DG, Honey A: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the prone and prone flexed positions: anatomical considerations. J Endourol 2009;10:1607–1614.
3.
Grasso M, Nord R, Bagley DH: Prone split-leg and flank-roll positioning: simultaneous antegrade and retrograde access to the upper urinary tract. J Endourol 1993;7:307–310.
4.
Kerbl K, Clayman RV, Chandhoke PS, Urban DA, De Leo BC, Carbone JM: Percutaneous stone removal with the patient in a flank position. J Urol 1994;151:686–688.
5.
Valdivia Uría JG, Valle Gerhold J, López-López JA, Villarroya Rodriguez S, Ambroj Navarro C, Ramirez Fabián M, Rodriguez Bazalo JM, Sánchez Elipe MA: Technique and complications of percutaneous nephroscopy: experience with 557 patients in the supine position. J Urol 1998;160:1975–1978.
6.
Falahatkar S, Asli MM, Emadi SA, Enshaei A, Pourhadi H, Allahkhah A: Complete supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy (csPCNL) in patients with and without a history of stone surgery: safety and effectiveness of csPCNL. Urol Res 2011;39:295–301.
7.
Ibarluzea G, Scoffone CM, Cracco CM, Poggio M, Porpiglia F, Terrone C, et al: Supine Valdivia and modified lithotomy position for simultaneous anterograde and retrograde endourological access. BJU Int 2007;100:233–236.
8.
Papatsoris AG, Zaman F, Panah A, Masood J, El-Husseiny T, Buchholz N: Simultaneous anterograde and retrograde endourologic access: ‘the Barts technique’. J Endourol 2008;22:2665–2666.
9.
Wu P, Wang L, Wang K: Supine versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy for kidney calculi: a meta-analysis. Int Urol Nephrol 2011;43:67–77.
10.
Liu L, Zheng S, Xu Y, Wei Q: Systematic review and meta-analysis of percutaneous nephrolithotomy for patients in the supine versus prone position. J Endourol 2010;24:1941–1946.
© 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel
2012
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.