A Randomized Study of Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) with the aid of a patented suctioning sheath in the treatment of renal calculus complicated by pyonephrosis by one surgery.

BACKGROUND: Calculus pyonephrosis is difficult to manage. The aim of this study is to explore the value of a patented suctioning sheath assisted minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) in the treatment of calculus pyonephrosis. METHODS: One hundred and eighty two patients with calculus pyonephrosis were randomizely divided into observation group (n = 91) and control group (n = 91). The control group was treated with MPCNL traditionally using peel-away sheath while the observation group was treated with MPCNL using the patented suctioning sheath. RESULTS: All the patients in the observation group underwent one stage surgical treatment, 14 patients in the control group underwent first-stage surgery with the rest of the group underwent one stage surgery. The complication rate was 12.1% in the observation group, significantly lower than the rate in the control group which was 51.6%; One surgery stone clearance in the observation group was 96.7% while it was 73.6% in the control group; operative time in the observation group was (54.5 ± 14.5) min, compared to (70.2 ± 11.7) min in the control group; the bleeding amount in the observation group was (126.4 ± 47.2) ml, compared to (321.6 ± 82.5) ml in the control group; the hospitalization duration for the observation group was (6.4 ± 2.3) days, compared to (10.6 ± 3.7) days in the control group. Comparison of the above indicators, the observation group was better than the control group with significant difference (p < 0.001 each). CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy with the aid of the patented suctioning sheath in the treatment of calculus pyonephrosis in one surgery is economic, practical, and warrants clinical promotion. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered with Chinese Clinical Trial Registry on May 18, 2016 (retrospective registration) with a trial registration number of ChiCTR-IOR-16008490 .

A comparison of supracostal and infracostal access approaches in treating renal and upper ureteral stones using MPCNL with the aid of a patented system.

BACKGROUND: There are still disagreements on which is a better approach to choose to establish percutaneous tract for percutaneous nephrolitotomy (PCNL), between supracostal and infracostal approaches. The aim of this study is to investigate the safety, efficacy and practicability of minimally invasive PCNL (MPCNL) with the aid of a patented system either through supracostal or through infracostal access. METHODS: A retrospective study was carried out for 83 patients with renal or upper ureteral stones. Under the guidance of B ultrasound or C-arm, these patients were treated by MPCNL through either 12th rib infracostal (Group 1, 43 cases) or supracostal (Group 2, 40 cases) access approach. These 2 groups were compared for total number of percutaneous tracts, average time in establishing a given percutaneous tract, the number of percutaneous tract used for each case, the average stone clearance time, the clearance rate of all stones by one surgery, and the amount of bleeding using a single percutaneous tract. RESULTS: There was a significantly smaller total number of percutaneous tracts needed, a smaller number of cases that needed two percutaneous tracts to clear stones completely, a shorter average time in establishing a percutaneous tract, and a smaller average amount of bleeding in infracostal access group. At the same time, there were a significantly larger number of cases in which stones were cleared completely using a single percutaneous tract and a higher renal stone clearance rate by one surgery. CONCLUSION: There were several advantages of infracostal access. These included accuracy in establishing a percutaneous tract, safety, quickness, convenience and flexibility in moving the patented sheath, and higher renal and upper ureteral stone clearance rate by one surgery.

Animal Experimental Study to Test Application of Intelligent Pressure Control Device in Monitoring and Control of Renal Pelvic Pressure During Flexible Ureteroscopy.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the application of intelligent pressure control devices (medical irrigation and suctioning platform with pressure feedback function, and suctioning ureteral access sheath with pressure-measuring function) in flexible ureteroscopy for monitoring and control of renal pelvic pressure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nine pigs with a total of 18 kidneys were randomly divided into 3 groups according to varied renal perfusion flow rates: group A, 50 mL/min; group B, 100 mL/min; and group C, 150 mL/min. A ureteral catheter connected to an invasive blood pressure monitor was retrogradely placed to the upper renal calyx to measure upper calyceal pressure; the suctioning sheath was connected to a 3-channel tubing and was connected to an invasive blood pressure monitor; and the platform and renal pelvic outlet pressure was measured. Perfusion flow, intraluminal pressure control, and warning values were preset on the platform. A flexible ureteroscope was inserted into the upper, mid, and lower renal calyces, and to the front end of the sheath, respectively, each location was irrigated for 5 minutes, and pressure was measured every second. RESULTS: No statistical significance was found between monitor renal pelvic outlet pressure and platform renal pelvic outlet pressure for each group, or between platform renal pelvic outlet pressure and upper renal caliceal pressure for each group at different locations when varied irrigation flow rates were used, or among groups for platform renal pelvic outlet pressure at various irrigation flow rates. CONCLUSION: The intelligent devices used in the flexible ureteroscopy can reliably and stably monitor and control the renal pelvic pressure within a safety range.

Comparative study of outcome in treating upper ureteral impacted stones using minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy with aid of patented system or transurethral ureteroscopy.

OBJECTIVE: To determine an efficient method for treating upper ureteral impacted stones, we compared the outcome of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy with the aid of our patented system and transurethral ureteroscopy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 182 patients with complicated impacted upper ureteral stones above the level of L4 were randomly divided into 2 groups. Group 1 included 91 patients who were treated with minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy with the aid of a patented system. Group 2 included 91 patients who were treated with ureteroscopy. The patients underwent postoperative shock wave lithotripsy, when necessary. The operative time, stone clearance rate, operative complication markers (amount of intraoperative bleeding and postoperative fever rate), and cost of treatment were compared. RESULTS: A significantly shorter operative time, greater rate of stone clearance, lower need for postoperative shock wave lithotripsy, and lower rate of postoperative fever was found in group 1 than in group 2 (P <.05). However, the cost of treatment and amount of intraoperative bleeding were significantly greater. CONCLUSION: We believe minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy with the aid of the patented system could be the first choice in treating complicated impacted upper ureteral stones above the level of L4.

The application of a patented system to minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

PURPOSE: To investigate the clinical effect of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) using a patented irrigation and clearance system. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From August 2008 to August 2009, 60 patients with renal stones ≥2.0 cm were randomly assigned to two groups. Group 1 included 30 patients who were treated by MPCNL through a patented 16F sheath with the aid of a patented irrigation and clearance system combined with a high power holmium laser. Group 2 included 30 patients who were treated by a third generation EMS ultrasound/ballistic trajectory lithotripsy and clearance system through a standard 24F sheath. The differences in (1) average time needed for stone clearance; (2) percentage of cases in which one surgery resulted in freedom from stones; (3) mean renal pelvic pressure; and (4) mean amount of intraoperative bleeding were compared. RESULTS: Compared with the EMS ballistic trajectory/ultrasound lithotripsy and clearance system, the MPCNL irrigation and clearance system had a significantly higher percentage of stone-free outcomes after one surgery and a lower amount of introperative bleeding (P<0.05). There was no difference in mean stone-clearance time and mean renal pelvic pressure (P>0.05). When comparing the cases with one percutaneous tract in the patented system group with the cases with one percutaneous tract in the EMS system group, the findings were similar. CONCLUSION: The patented MPCNL irrigation and clearance system is safe and highly efficient in managing renal stones.