Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus open surgery for treatment of staghorn stones in pediatric patients

Authors

  • Ahmed R. EL-Nahas Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University
  • Ahmed A Shokeir Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University
  • Ahmed M Shoma Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University
  • Ibrahim Eraky Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University
  • Osama M Sarhan Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University
  • Ashraf T Hafez Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University
  • Mohamed S Dawaba Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University
  • Ahmed M Elshal Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University
  • Ahmed M Ghali Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University
  • Mahmoud R EL-Kenawy Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.1994

Keywords:

Percutaneous, Nephrolithotomy, Staghorn, Renal calculi, Pediatric, Children

Abstract

Introduction: We compare percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and open surgery in the treatment of staghorn stones in children.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the electronic records of children who underwent treatment for staghorn stones between September 2000 and August 2013. They were divided between Group 1 (patients who underwent PCNL) and Group 2 (patients who underwent open surgery). We compared stone-free and complications rates, need for multiple procedures, and hospital stay.

Results: The study included 41 patients (35 boys and 6 girls), with mean age 7.4 ± 3.1 years (range: 2–15). Of these 41 patients, 26 had unilateral renal stone and 15 had bilateral renal stones. The total number of treated renal units was 56: 28 underwent PCNL and 28 underwent open surgery. The complication rate was comparable for both groups (32% for open surgery vs. 28.6%, p = 0.771). Multiple procedures were more needed in PCNL group (60.7% vs. 32% in open surgery, p = 0.032). The stone-free rate was 71.4% after PCNL and 78.6% after open surgery (p = 0.537). A significant difference was observed in shorter hospital stay after PCNL (5 vs. 8.8 days, p < 0.001). Our study’s limitations include its retrospective design and relatively small sample size.

Conclusions: For the treatment of staghorn stones in children, PCNL was comparable to open surgery in complication and stone-free rates. PCNL had the advantage of a shorter hospital stay and open surgery showed a decreased need for multiple procedures.

 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Ahmed R. EL-Nahas, Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University

Urology Department

Ahmed A Shokeir, Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University

Urology department

Ahmed M Shoma, Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University

Urology department

Ibrahim Eraky, Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University

Urology Department

Osama M Sarhan, Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University

Urology department

Ashraf T Hafez, Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University

Urology department

Mohamed S Dawaba, Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University

Urology department

Ahmed M Elshal, Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University

Urology department

Ahmed M Ghali, Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University

Urology department

Mahmoud R EL-Kenawy, Urology and Nephrology Center, Mansoura University

Urology department

Downloads

Published

2014-12-15

How to Cite

EL-Nahas, A. R., Shokeir, A. A., Shoma, A. M., Eraky, I., Sarhan, O. M., Hafez, A. T., Dawaba, M. S., Elshal, A. M., Ghali, A. M., & EL-Kenawy, M. R. (2014). Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus open surgery for treatment of staghorn stones in pediatric patients. Canadian Urological Association Journal, 8(11-12), e906–9. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.1994

Issue

Vol. 8 No. 11-12 (2014): CUAJ December

Section

Original Research

License

You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:

  • Post the Article on any Web site
  • Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.

The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.

You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.

The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:

  • That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
  • That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
  • That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
  • That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.