medigraphic.com
Organo Oficial de la Sociedad Mexicana de Urología

2024, Number 4

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Urol 2024; 84 (4)

The role of laparoscopic surgery in the management of urinary lithiasis in the era of endourology in Mexico

Tena-González MG, García-Escobar JC, Jiménez-Cisneros E, Maldonado-Ávila M, Manzanilla-García HA, Corona-Montes VE, Garduño-Arteaga LM, Jaspersen-Gastelum J, Rosas-Nava JE

Language: English
References: 25
Page: 1-12
PDF size: 467.93 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: The aim of the present study was to describe the results of a case series of laparoscopic pyelolithotomies and ureterolithotomies performed at the Hospital General de México and demonstrate that the laparoscopic management still has a place among the therapeutic options in our country.
Material and methods: Retrospective analysis on patients that underwent laparoscopic pyelolithotomy or laparoscopic ureterolithotomy, within the time frame of 2013 and 2022. Intraoperative variables of blood loss, surgery duration, and complications; and the postoperative variables of hospital stay, time to double-J stent removal, and complications were analyzed.
Results: 46 underwent laparoscopic pyelolithotomy and 29 underwent laparoscopic ureterolithotomy. Mean patient age was 45 years. Forty- three of the procedures were right-sided, 31 were left-sided, and there was one case of ectopic pelvic kidney. The pyelolithotomy results were: stone size of 24x20mm (8.8-60 x 5-60), 1034 HU, S.T.O.N.E. score of 6, surgery duration of 124 min, blood loss of 72ml, and hospital stay of 2.3 days. The ureterolithotomy results were: stone size of 22x11mm (10-80mm x 7.8-20), 980 HU, surgery duration of 101min, blood loss of 31ml, and hospital stay of 2.4 days. There were 3 intraoperative complications and 4 postoperative complications.
Conclusión: Laparoscopic surgery can be a feasible and reproducible alternative to endourologic management, with good results, in large volume (›20mm) single stones.


REFERENCES

  1. Rukin NJ, Siddiqui ZA, Chedgy ECP, Somani BK.Trends in Upper Tract Stone Disease in England:Evidence from the Hospital Episodes StatisticsDatabase. Urologia Internationalis. 2017;98(4):391–396. https://doi.org/10.1159/000449510.

  2. Curhan GC. Epidemiology of Stone Disease. TheUrologic clinics of North America. 2007;34(3): 287–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ucl.2007.04.003.

  3. Ortegón-Gallareta R, Aguilar-Moreno J,Álvarez-Baeza A, Méndez-Domínguez N,Pech-Cervantes PI. Perfil epidemiológico de lashospitalizaciones por urolitiasis en el Estado deYucatán, México. Revista Mexicana de Urología.2019;79(5): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.48193/revistamexicanadeurologa.v79i5.517.

  4. Shah J, Whitfield HN. Urolithiasis throughthe ages. BJU international. 2002;89(8):801–810. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410x.2002.02769.x.

  5. Jones P, Elmussareh M, Aboumarzouk OM,Mucksavage P, Somani BK. Role of MinimallyInvasive (Micro and Ultra-mini) PCNL forAdult Urinary Stone Disease in the Modern Era:Evidence from a Systematic Review. CurrentUrology Reports. 2018;19(4): 27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-018-0764-5.

  6. Ng ACF, Wong MYC, Isotani S, PracticalManagement of Urinary Stone. Singapore:Springer; 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-4193-0.

  7. European Association of Urology. EAUGuidelines on Urolithiasis. 2022 https://uroweb.org/guidelines/urolithiasis

  8. American Urological Association. KidneyStones: Surgical Management Guideline. 2022

  9. Doizi S, Traxer O. Flexible ureteroscopy:technique, tips and tricks. Urolithiasis.2018;46(1): 47–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-017-1030-x

  10. Proietti S, Rodríguez-Socarrás ME, EisnerB, De Coninck V, Sofer M, Saitta G, et al.Supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy: tipsand tricks. Translational Andrology and Urology.2019;8(Suppl 4): S381–S388. https://doi.org/10.21037/tau.2019.07.09.

  11. Bayne DB, Chi TL. Assessing Cost-Effectivenessof New Technologies in Stone Management.The Urologic Clinics of North America.2019;46(2): 303–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ucl.2018.12.011.

  12. Yadav R, Kumar R, Hemal AK. Laparoscopyin the management of stone disease ofurinary tract. Journal of Minimal AccessSurgery. 2005;1(4): 173–180. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-9941.19264.

  13. Hejj R, McNulty M, Calleary JG, Hejj R,McNulty M, Calleary JG. Urology: The Homeof Endoscopy. In: Advances in EndoscopicSurgery. IntechOpen; 2011. https://doi.org/10.5772/24729.

  14. Al-Awadi K, Kehinde EO, Al-Hunayan A, Al-Khayat A. Iatrogenic ureteric injuries: incidence,aetiological factors and the effect of earlymanagement on subsequent outcome. InternationalUrology and Nephrology. 2005;37(2): 235–241.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-004-7970-4

  15. de la Rosette J, Denstedt J, Geavlete P,Keeley F, Matsuda T, Pearle M, et al. Theclinical research office of the endourologicalsociety ureteroscopy global study: indications,complications, and outcomes in 11,885 patients.Journal of Endourology. 2014;28(2): 131–139.https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2013.0436.

  16. de la Rosette J, Assimos D, Desai M, GutierrezJ, Lingeman J, Scarpa R, et al. The ClinicalResearch Office of the Endourological SocietyPercutaneous Nephrolithotomy Global Study:indications, complications, and outcomesin 5803 patients. Journal of Endourology.2011;25(1): 11–17. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2010.0424.

  17. Simforoosh N, Aminsharifi A. Laparoscopicmanagement in stone disease. Current Opinionin Urology. 2013;23(2): 169–174. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOU.0b013e32835d307f.

  18. Hassan Y, Rather AA, Bashir A, Wani IA,Rasool H. Comparative Study of Laparoscopicand Open Pyelolithotomy in the Managementof Large Renal Pelvic Stones. Ibnosina Journal ofMedicine and Biomedical Sciences. 2022;14: 022–027. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1749143.

  19. Hamid CA, Ankur S, Sathish R. Laparoscopicmanagement of urinary tract calculi: uncommonbut effective alternative to open surgery incertain situations. International Archives ofIntegrated Medicine. 2019;6(5)

  20. Bai Y, Tang Y, Deng L, Wang X, Yang Y,Wang J, et al. Management of large renalstones: laparoscopic pyelolithotomy versuspercutaneous nephrolithotomy. BMC urology.2017;17(1): 75. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-017-0266-7

  21. Kusuma Duarsa GW, Wisnu Tirtayasa PM,Pramana IBP, Yudiana IW, Santosa KB,Oka AAG. Meta-Analysis of LaparoscopicPyelolithotomy versus PercutaneousNephrolithotomy as a Treatment of LargeKidney Stones. Open Access Macedonian Journalof Medical Sciences. 2022;10(F): 113–121.https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2022.8122.

  22. Wu T, Duan X, Chen S, Yang X, Tang T,Cui S. Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy versusLaparoscopic Ureterolithotomy or PercutaneousNephrolithotomy in the Management of LargeProximal Ureteral Stones: A Systematic Reviewand Meta-Analysis. Urologia Internationalis.2017;99(3): 308–319. https://doi.org/10.1159/000471773.

  23. Choi JD, Seo SI, Kwon J, Kim BS. LaparoscopicUreterolithotomy vs Ureteroscopic Lithotripsyfor Large Ureteral Stones. JSLS : Journal ofthe Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons.2019;23(2): e2019.00008. https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2019.00008

  24. Güler Y, Erbin A. Comparative evaluationof retrograde intrarenal surgery, antegradeureterorenoscopy and laparoscopicureterolithotomy in the treatment of impactedproximal ureteral stones larger than 1.5cm. Central European Journal of Urology.2021;74(1): 57–63. https://doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2021.0174.R1.

  25. Lai S, Jiao B, Diao T, Seery S, Hu M, Wang M,et al. Optimal management of large proximalureteral stones (>10 mm): A systematicreview and meta-analysis of 12 randomizedcontrolled trials. International Journal of Surgery.2020;80: 205–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.06.025




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com