
doi: 10.5301/ru.2012.9024
pmid: 22328415
Aims Prone and supine positions for percutaneous nephrolithotomy are widely used but have their drawbacks. We report a new positioning method called “flank suspended supine position” (FSSP) for PCNL and describe our experience with PCNL in this position to evaluate its safety and efficacy. Methods Retrospective study of 150 cases of renal stone patients treated with PCNL in a new position called flank suspended supine position (FSSP) from June 2009 to July 2010. All patients were treated with PCNL in FSSP under epidural anesthesia. Operation time, bleeding rate, stone free rate, and complications were recorded. Results All patients tolerated FSSP. Mean operation time was 78.29±26.13 min. Initial stone-free rate was 83%. For those with residual stones (26 cases), 18 were stone-free after a second PCNL, 8 after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). Mean hospital stay was 7.63±2.39 days. No penetrating injury of the pleural cavity or injury to visceral organs was reported. Summary FSSP is an effective and safe position for PCNL in our hands and its effectiveness relative to traditional prone position needs to be determined in future randomized studies.
Adult, Anesthesia, Epidural, Male, Operative Time, Length of Stay, Middle Aged, Kidney, Patient Positioning, Kidney Calculi, Lithotripsy, Supine Position, Humans, Female, Stents, Intraoperative Complications, Aged, Nephrostomy, Percutaneous, Retrospective Studies
Adult, Anesthesia, Epidural, Male, Operative Time, Length of Stay, Middle Aged, Kidney, Patient Positioning, Kidney Calculi, Lithotripsy, Supine Position, Humans, Female, Stents, Intraoperative Complications, Aged, Nephrostomy, Percutaneous, Retrospective Studies
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 6 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
