Analysis and literature review of intracavitary operation for calyceal diverticulum calculi
10.3969/j.issn.1009-8291.2024.08.007
- VernacularTitle:肾盏憩室结石腔内手术治疗单中心分析并文献复习
- Author:
Yong LUO
1
,
2
;
Ming CHEN
;
Guangyang LIU
;
Huajian SU
;
Jiahui TANG
;
Qingfeng YU
;
Ming LEI
Author Information
1. 广州医科大学附属第一医院泌尿外科,广东省泌尿外科重点实验室,广州市泌尿外科研究所,广东广州 510145
2. 佛山市顺德区第三人民医院(佛山市顺德区北滘医院)泌尿外科,广东佛山 528000
- Keywords:
calyceal diverticulum calculi;
calyceal diverticulum;
retrograde intrarenal surgery;
percutaneous nephrolithotomy;
extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy
- From:
Journal of Modern Urology
2024;29(8):696-698
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To analyze the efficacy of different intracavitary operations for calyceal diverticulum calculi,so as to provide reference for the diagnosis and treatment of such disease.Methods A retrospective analysis of the data of 21 patients with calyceal diverticulum calculi was conducted during Jan.2015 and Dec.2021.The patients were divided into the retrograde intrarenal surgery(RIRS,n=14)group and percutaneous nephrolithotomy(PCNL,n=7)group.The perioperative data were compared.Results There was no significant difference in stone load between the RIRS group and PCNL group[(11.56±4.79)mm vs.(13.06±6.27)mm,P=0.609].There were significant differences in the thickness of renal parenchyma at the top of the diverticulum[(10.08±4.81)mm vs.(5.24±2.23)mm,P=0.005],operation time[(58.57±19.23)min vs.(88.29±25.28)min,P=0.007],hospitalization time[3(1,5)vs.12(5,7),P=0.023]days.After operation,there were no significant differences in stone-clearance rate,decrease of hemoglobin,and postoperative complications between the two groups(P＞0.05).Conclusion Both RIRS and PCNL are viable options for treating renal calyceal diverticulum calculi.RIRS has advantages of shorter operation time and hospital stay.PCNL can be an alternative treatment when RIRS is unsuccessful.
