RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To find patients at high risk of obstructive remnant leaflets after valve ablation among boys with posterior urethral valve (PUV), we evaluated any possible relationship between preoperative findings in our patients and residual obstructive leaflets after valve ablation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 55 patients with PUV that was treated by the same surgeon between 2008 and 2012. Of these, 37 patients (67.3%) had no obstructive remnant leaflets (group A) and 18 patients (32.7%) had obstructive remnant leaflets (group B) in follow-up cystoscopy. Preoperative clinical and radiological findings were evaluated and compared between the groups. RESULTS: AMONG ALL THE PREOPERATIVE DATA WE EXAMINED, THE ANALYSIS REVEALED THAT AGE AT THE TIME OF SURGERY (MEDIAN AGE: group A, 15 months; group B, 7 months; p=0.017), echogenicity of kidneys (p<0.05), presence of vesicoureteral reflux (p<0.05), and grade of reflux (p<0.05) were significantly different between the groups. Method of valve ablation, anterior-posterior diameters of the renal pelvis, renal cortical thickness, bladder wall thickening, and scarring on the dimercaptosuccinic acid scan showed no significant differences between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In our patients, younger age at surgery time, hyperechogenicity of renal parenchyma, presence of vesicoureteral reflux, and grade 4 or 5 reflux before surgery had a significant relationship with residual valves. More studies may result in enhanced management of patients at high risk of residual valves after PUV ablation, because the sooner the obstruction is resolved entirely, the better the outcome.
RESUMEN
To prospectively compare the outcome of laparoscopic pyelolithotomy (LP) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in patients with a solitary renal pelvis stone larger than 30 mm. We analyzed demographic and perioperative parameters and intermediate outcome in 30 adults who underwent transperitoneal LP for solitary renal pelvis stone larger than 30 mm (Group I) and compared the results with 30 patients who underwent PCNL (Group II). The two groups were matched for age, sex and stone size (Group I 35.3 ± 7.33 mm, Group II 36.6 ± 7.0 mm; P = 0.47). Mean operative time was significantly longer in LP group (120.5 ± 39.94 min versus 98.1 ± 23.28 min; P = 0.01, 95 % CI 5.43-39.23). Stone-free rate after LP was significantly higher than after PCNL (100 % versus 76.7 %; P = 0.01). On the discharge day, no residual stone was found in LP group, and significant residual stone (mean size 9.8 mm, range 7-15 mm) was found in seven patients (23.3 %) in PCNL group. After the ancillary procedures, the stone-free rates were 100 % in LP and 96.6 % in PCNL group at the end of follow-up. The average overall treatment cost was significantly lower in LP (683.9 USD versus 815.9 USD; P < 0.001). Mean postoperative decreases in hemoglobin was similar in both groups. Given adequate laparoscopic experience, for patients with a solitary renal pelvis stone larger than 3 cm, LP can be considered as an appropriate second choice to PCNL. It can be a potentially cost-effective treatment option in terms of one-session stone-free rate and postoperative complications. However, the potential benefits of LP need to be weighed against the more invasive nature of this procedure.
